Department of Justice Canada
2007 - 2008
Departmental Performance Report
Robert Douglas Nicholson
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
2
Table of Contents
SECTION I – OVERVIEW...................................................................................... 5
Message from the Minister of Justice...................................................................................................5
Message from the Deputy Minister......................................................................................................6
Management Representation Statement.............................................................................................7
Summary Information...........................................................................................................................8
SECTION II – ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY
STRATEGIC OUTCOME..................................................................................... 19
Strategic Outcome I: A fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values....19
Strategic Outcome II: A federal government that is supported by effective and
responsive legal services...............................................................................36
SECTION III – SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION........................................... 53
Departmental Link to Government of Canada Outcome Areas.......................................................53
Comparison of Planned to Actual Spending (including FTEs).........................................................54
Voted and Statutory Items...................................................................................................................55
List of Online Tables.............................................................................................................................55
SECTION IV – OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST..................................................... 57
Corporate Management......................................................................................................................57
Legislation for which the Department is Responsible......................................................................60
Contact Information............................................................................................................................62
Information Online..............................................................................................................................63
Department of Justice 3
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
4
I. Overview
Section I – Overview
Message from the Minister of Justice
I am pleased to report on the performance of the Department of Justice
for 2007–2008.
The Department remains committed to fulfilling its unique role as
the federal government’s steward of Canada’s justice system. Over this
past year, the Department has continued to support the Government of
Canada in its pursuit of a justice system that is increasingly accessible
and effective, as well as accountable and responsive.
The Department played a key role in helping the Government of
Canada to deliver its legislative agenda over the reporting period: the
House passed legislation with regard to conditional sentencing and the age of protection, and
bills imposing mandatory minimum penalties for gun crimes and bail provisions for offences
involving firearms and drug- and alcohol-impaired driving received Royal Assent.
In addition, the Department was very active in developing and implementing the new National
Anti-Drug Strategy. This collaborative effort partnered the Department of Justice with Public
Safety Canada and Health Canada to prevent illegal drug use in young people, treat people who
have drug addictions and fight related crime. Activities under the Strategy included introducing
legislation to ensure mandatory jail time for serious drug crimes.
As well, the Department launched a review of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, beginning with a
meeting in February in Ottawa with the provincial/territorial Attorneys General. This review
comes as part of the government’s commitment to strengthen the Act, which includes introducing
legislation to provide new measures to protect communities from young offenders who pose a
significant risk to public safety.
In other efforts to build a more effective and accessible justice system, the Department worked
closely with the Steering Committee on Justice Efficiencies and Access. As well, the Department
supported the establishment of the new arm’s-length Office of the Federal Ombudsman for
Victims of Crime.
As Minister of Justice, I will continue to work with all levels of government, our stakeholders and
the public to strengthen the security of Canadians and ensure that they have confidence in our
justice system. And as always, I will be relying on the professionalism and expertise of the
public servants of the Department, as our government continues to pursue this agenda.
I invite you to read this document for further details regarding our performance over the past year.
The Honourable Rob Nicholson, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Department of Justice 5
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Message from the Deputy Minister
I am pleased to present the 2007–2008 Departmental Performance Report for the Department
of Justice. In reading this report, the reader will gain an understanding of what the Department
of Justice accomplished with the resources entrusted to it by Parliament.
The report is divided into four sections beginning with an overview that provides the required
information in a standard format. The second section provides details regarding the
expenditures and results achieved broken down by program activity. The third section presents
comprehensive information about the Department’s expenditures, while the fourth and final
section provides information concerning some of the Department’s key corporate initiatives.
Throughout this report, we have detailed the active role played by the Department in advancing
the government’s five key priorities.1 The Department played a key role in: supporting the
Minister of Justice in delivering on the government’s agenda on Tackling Crime and
Strengthening the Security of Canadians, as well as helping develop Canada’s new National
Anti-Drug Strategy and improving the Youth Criminal Justice Act, beginning in early 2008 with
an overall review of the Act.
As well, the Department’s accomplishments are rooted in its critical role in helping client
departments to achieve their priorities through the provision of an integrated suite of legal
advisory, legislative and litigation services to government. In this vein, over the course of
2007–08, the Department supported the Government of Canada in pursuing a comprehensive
legislative agenda, resulting in 63 bills being tabled in Parliament and 474 regulations being
published in the Canada Gazette. The Department also provided legal policy advice on a broad
range of files relating to such diverse subjects as protecting Canadian sovereignty, enhancing
border security, protecting the integrity of the food supply chain, and determining the
implications of spending and taxation measures. As well, the Department successfully
represented the Crown’s interests in several major court cases.
And on the management side, our Management Accountability Framework ratings from
Treasury Board Secretariat have continued to show that our management practices and
capacity support sound stewardship of the resources entrusted to us. I take pride in the
Department’s achievements. They represent some of the key building blocks that will help us in
our public service renewal efforts as we strive to ensure that the Department is an organization
well positioned to meet the ever-increasing demands on government in the twenty-first century.
1
6
http://www.sft-ddt.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=1364
I. Overview
Management Representation Statement
I submit for tabling in Parliament, the 2007–08 Departmental Performance Report for the
Department of Justice Canada.
This document has been prepared based on the reporting principles contained in the
Guide to the Preparation of Part III of the 2007–2008 Estimates: Reports on Plans and Priorities
and Departmental Performance Reports:
• It adheres to the specific reporting requirements outlined in the Treasury Board
Secretariat guidance;
• It is based on the department’s approved Strategic Outcome(s) and Program
Activity Architecture that were approved by the Treasury Board;
• It presents consistent, comprehensive, balanced and reliable information;
• It provides a basis of accountability for the results achieved with the resources
and authorities entrusted to it; and
• It reports finances based on approved numbers from the Estimates and the
Public Accounts of Canada.
John H. Sims
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Department of Justice 7
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Summary Information
Raison d’être
The justice system defines and prescribes the balance between collective and individual rights
and responsibilities that ensure a well-ordered society. As such, it affects almost every facet of
Canadians’ daily lives from guiding everyday activities that ensure our safety to supporting
social policies and social benefits, regulating our economy, and offering ways to resolve
disputes peacefully where there are disagreements or conflicts between individuals,
organizations and/or governments.
Maintaining a system that serves all Canadians is a central focus for the Department of Justice
(Department, or DoJ), which strives to ensure that the system remains fair, accessible and
efficient as it evolves in response to social change.
The Department of Justice plays an important role in supporting the Government of Canada’s
priority of protecting Canadian families and communities. Furthermore, the Department of
Justice is a federal organization that supports the Government of Canada’s priorities through the
provision of an integrated suite of common legal services to federal departments and agencies.
Role of the Department
The Department of Justice is headed by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
The responsibilities of the Minister and the Attorney General are set out in the Department of
Justice Act and 47 other Acts of Parliament. The Department of Justice fulfills three distinctive
roles within the Government of Canada, acting as:
• a policy department with broad responsibilities for overseeing all matters relating to the administration of justice that fall within the federal domain;
• a provider of a range of legal advisory, litigation and legislative services to government departments and agencies; and
• the central agency responsible for supporting the Minister in advising Cabinet on all legal matters including the constitutionality of government activities.
The Department’s mission is threefold:
• to support the Minister of Justice in working to ensure that Canada is a just and law-abiding society with an accessible, efficient and fair system of justice;
• to provide high-quality legal services and counsel to the government and to client departments and agencies; and
• to promote respect for rights and freedoms, the rule of law and the Constitution.
8
I. Overview
Strategic Outcomes and Program Activity Architecture
In supporting the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, the Department of Justice
strives to attain two overarching strategic outcomes: (i) a fair, relevant and accessible justice
system that reflects Canadian values; and (ii) a federal government that is supported by effective
and responsive legal services.
The Department of Justice’s two strategic outcomes reflect the dual responsibilities of the
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada. While the Minister of Justice is concerned
with questions of policy particularly as they relate to his role as a steward of the Canadian
justice system, the Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer for the Crown.
In support of the first strategic outcome, the Department has two program activities —
Justice policies, laws and programs, and the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of
Crime. The Department’s program sub-activities (i.e., criminal justice, family justice, access
to justice, Aboriginal justice, and private international and public law) in support of the first
strategic outcome reflect the specific domains within which the Department supports the
government’s legal policy and program initiatives.
In support of its second strategic outcome, the Department has one program activity —
Services to government. Through this program activity, the Department delivers an integrated
suite of common legal advisory, litigation and legislative drafting services through its Portfolios
to government departments and agencies. These services support overall government priorities
and promote respect for the rule of law and the Constitution.
Department of Justice 9
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Department of Justice Program Activity Architecture
Strategic
Outcomes
A fair, relevant and
accessible justice
system that reflects
Canadian values
A federal government that is
supported by effective and
responsive legal services
A1 Justice policies, laws
and programs
A1.1 Aboriginal justice
B1 Services to government
C1 Internal services*
B1.1
Legal services to government-at-large and the
Justice Portfolio
C1.1
Management and Oversight Services
C1.2
Evaluation Services
B1.2
Legal services to
the Aboriginal
Affairs Portfolio
C1.3
Internal
Audit Services
C1.4
Public Affairs/ Communications Services
C1.5
Financial Management Services
C1.6
Human Resources Management
C1.7
Information Management Services
C1.8
Information Technology Services
C1.9
Legal Services
A1.2
Criminal justice
A1.3
Family justice
A1.4
Access to justice
A1.5
A2
Private international and public law
Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime
B1.3
Legal services to
the Business
and Regulatory
Law Portfolio
B1.4
Legal services to
the Central
Agencies Portfolio
B1.5
Legal services to
the Citizenship,
Immigration and
Public Safety Portfolio
B1.6
Legal services to the
Tax Law Portfolio
C1.10 Other Support
Services
*
10
It should be noted that Program Activity C1 – Internal services is proportionally allocated across program activities A1, A2 and B1 and therefore does not appear in financial tables.
I. Overview
Program Activity Architecture (PAA) Crosswalk
($ millions)
New PAA (2008-09)
Old PAA (2007-08)
Justice
Policies,
Laws and
Programs (A1)
The Office of
Services to
Total
the Federal
Government
Actual
Ombudsman
(B1)
Spending
for Victims of
Crime (A2)
Developing Policies
and Law (A1)
39.5
39.5
Developing and
Implementing Programs (A2)
368.8
368.8
Office of the Federal
Ombudsman for Victims
of Crime (A3)
0.7
Providing Legal Advisory,
Litigation and Legislative
Services to Government (B1)
Total
408.3
0.7
0.7
277.2
277.2
277.2
686.2
Note: The Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime spending authority is included in the Department
of Justice but reports independently to the Minister of Justice.
Financial and Human Resources
Financial Resources (in millions of dollars)
Planned Spending
Total Authorities
Actual Spending
717.7
733.9
686.2
Department of Justice 11
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
For fiscal year 2007-2008, actual spending for the Department totalled $686.2M, which was
$47.7 million less than the total spending levels authorized by Parliament.2
Approximately 60 per cent of the department’s expenditures ($409 million) were in support
of a fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values. Most of these
expenditures (88 per cent) were in the form of grants and contributions, of which the vast
majority were to the provinces and territories to support their delivery of legal aid programs
and youth justice services.
Approximately 40 per cent ($277.2 million) of departmental expenditures were related to
supporting the federal government with effective and responsive legal services.
2007-2008 Actual Spending by Strategic Outcomes
2
12
Vote 1– Operating expenditures accounted for $29.7 million of the surplus while the remaining $18.0 million of the
surplus was Vote 5 – Grants and Contribution expenses. The bulk of the surplus operating expenditures are related
to delays in completing staffing processes and in higher than anticipated cost recoveries in the first year of
operation of the department’s Net Vote Authority Regime. The surplus in grants and contribution stemmed
primarily from lower than anticipated spending related to the following three contribution programs: Victims
Fund, Integrated Market Enforcement Teams Reserve Fund and and Intensive Rehabilitative Custody and Supervision Program.
I. Overview
Summary of Performance by Program Activity
The table below summarizes the Department’s performance for fiscal year 2007–08 against the
two strategic outcomes and the associated program activities.
Strategic Outcome I: Fair, relevant and accessible justice systems that reflects Canadian values
Program Activities
Planned
Spending
Actual
Spending
($ millions)
($ millions)
Priorities
Ensuring an effective and
accessible justice system
(ongoing)
Justice policies, laws and
programs
429.6
408.3
Status: Met
Protecting Canadian
communities (ongoing)
Status: Met
Office of the Federal
Ombudsman for
Victims of Crime
1.5
0.7
Note: Federal Ombudsman
reports independently to
the Minister of Justice
Strategic Outcome II: Federal government supported by effective and responsive legal services
Program Activities
Services to government
Planned
Spending
Actual
Spending
($ millions)
($ millions)
286.6
277.2
Priorities
Supporting government
departments and agencies in
achieving Government of
Canada priorities (ongoing)
Status: Met
The Department met all of its priorities for fiscal year 2007–08.
Further details about performance and results can be found in Section II of this report.
Human Resources (in full-time equivalents)
Planned
Actual
Difference
4,140
4,239
99
Department of Justice 13
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
With 4,239 full-time equivalent employees during the reporting period, the Department of
Justice is classified as “large” by the Canada Public Service Agency. While roughly one-half of
departmental staff are lawyers, there are a number of other committed professionals including
paralegals, social scientists, program managers, communications specialists, administrative
services personnel, computer services professionals and financial officers. The vast majority
of our human resources are dedicated to providing legal services to government.
2007-2008 Actual FTEs by Strategic Outcomes
Organizational Information
The Department maintains a policy and program development capacity in order to fulfill core
departmental responsibilities associated with the administration of justice in Canada and to
support the Government of Canada’s policy and program priorities related to safety and security.
To these ends, the Department develops and maintains strong working relationships with
policy and program partners across the federal government as well as with counterparts in the
provinces and territories and partners in non-governmental organizations and international
institutions and organizations.
The Department provides legal services to government on a “portfolio” basis. Six Portfolios,
described in greater detail in Section II, encompass the entire range of federal departments
and agencies. The Department delivers services through a mix of co-located departmental legal
services units, specialized branches located within the Department of Justice and a network of
six regional offices located across the country.
14
I. Overview
Department of Justice 15
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
16
I. Overview
Governance Framework
The Department’s Governance Framework maps the departmental organizational structure to
the Program Activity Architecture. The Framework visually demonstrates the structure and
decision-making mechanisms for priority setting and resource allocations/reallocations, and
depicts how the Department coordinates and manages the achievements of its two core
strategic outcomes — a fair, relevant and accessible justice system; and effective and responsive
legal services to government.
The DM Team, which consists of the Deputy Minister, John Sims, and Associate Deputy
Ministers Donna Miller and Yves Côté, leads the Governance Framework. Together its members
share the workload and authority of the Office of the Deputy Minister in supporting the
Minister and in providing active leadership in the delivery of timely and effective advice and
legal services to client departments and their Deputy Ministers in support of government
priorities and results for Canadians.
This approach to governance has been chosen to ensure that deputy-level attention is brought
to bear on important departmental and whole-of-government files. To this end, each member
of the DM Team assumes responsibility for providing guidance, direction and support across
the Department in order to ensure that all senior executive managers have a direct link with a
member of the DM Team on key files and on management issues.
Factors Affecting Our Operating Environment
Many factors influence our operating environment and thus have impacts on our policy and
program development and implementation activities as well as our ability to effectively manage
and deliver high-quality legal services.
Public Confidence in the Justice System
Public confidence in the justice system is affected by a variety of factors that are beyond
the Department’s control, including the sensational media coverage of incidents of crime.
Such coverage can have an impact upon individual perceptions of the efficacy of the justice
system and of the risk to personal safety.
Additionally, factors such as the rising costs associated with obtaining access to justice have an
impact on public confidence. As Canadians rely on the justice system to provide an independent
and impartial forum for resolving disputes, the Department is keenly interested in the degree to
which the public has confidence in the justice system at large.
In 2008, the National Justice Survey’s data suggested that 70 per cent of Canadians have a high
or moderate confidence level in the adult criminal justice system while 59 per cent of
Canadians have a high or moderate confidence level in the youth criminal justice system.
Department of Justice 17
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Jurisprudence and Legal Trends
As the Government of Canada’s “law firm,” it is incumbent upon the Department of Justice’s
counsel to assess the implications of a wide variety of outcomes in the court system — both civil
and criminal — and incorporate these analyses in the delivery of legal advisory, litigation and
legislative services with a view to effectively manage legal risk. The Department must also
continuously assess its capacity to address emerging issues such as those in the areas of
international, Aboriginal, fiscal and commercial law.
Working with others
The justice system is multi-tiered and includes other participants such as nongovernmental and
community-based organizations with whom we work to generate innovative ideas about how to
improve access to the justice system, while respecting the diverse nature and needs of all
Canadians. Similarly, we work with federal departments and agencies in areas such as safety
and security and Aboriginal justice to help achieve overarching Government of Canada strategic
outcomes. Some of the others with whom we work include:
• the Canadian public, including non-governmental and community-based organizations, and representatives of official language and minority communities;
• Parliamentarians;
• the Judiciary, the Bar, la Chambre des notaires du Québec;
• law faculties and the research community;
• approximately 50 federal client departments and agencies3 ;
• provinces and territories; and
• foreign governments and international organizations, directly and in conjunction with Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada.
3
18
While the Department refers to federal departments and agencies as “clients” for ease of understanding, it is
important to note that all work is done on behalf of the Crown, not a specific branch of the Government of Canada.
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
SECTION II – ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM
ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Strategic Outcome I: A fair, relevant and accessible justice system
that reflects Canadian values
The Department of Justice works with partners across the federal, provincial and territorial
levels of governments and with stakeholders across Canada to develop and maintain a fair,
relevant and accessible justice system.
There are three core expected results related to this strategic outcome4:
• The Department continually responds to the evolving legal framework.
• Policies and laws are developed in response to identified needs and gaps and are
integrated with Government of Canada priorities and commitments.
• Programs are developed and implemented in response to identified needs and gaps and
are integrated with Government of Canada priorities and commitments.
In terms of performance against these three expected results, the Department actively
supported the government in responding to identified needs and gaps. By way of example, the
Department of Justice accounted for 21 of the 125 bills tabled in Parliament between April 2007
and March 2008. This represented 17 per cent of the government’s full legislative agenda in the
House for the period.
In responding to the government’s priorities with regard to the Tackling Crime agenda, the
Department dedicated significant human resources to the legislative reform process including
ongoing reviews of case law, significant federal-provincial-territorial consultations on reform
proposals and extensive work with senior officials from federal and provincial governments to
refine proposals.
The Department seeks to attain this strategic outcome through two program activities: Justice
policies, laws and programs; and the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime.
4
Strategic Outcome: A long-term, enduring benefit to Canadians that stems from a department or agency’s
mandate, vision and efforts. It represents the difference a department or agency wants to make for Canadians and
should be a clear measurable outcome that is within the department or agency’s sphere of influence.
(TBS Results Based Management Lexicon — http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/lex-lex_e.asp)
Department of Justice 19
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Program Activity A1: Justice policies, laws and programs 5
Under Canada’s federal system, the administration of justice is an area of shared jurisdiction
between the federal government and the provinces. Through this program activity, the
Department fulfills its constitutional responsibility to ensure a bilingual and bijural national
legal framework for the administration of justice by developing policies, laws and programs to
strengthen the national framework within the following domains: criminal justice (including
safety and security, youth criminal justice, support to victims of crime, and international
criminal justice); family justice; access to justice; Aboriginal justice; and, private international
and public law.
As well, in recognition of the federal government’s shared interest in a sustainable justice
system, the Department also provides significant ongoing funding to provinces and territories
for the delivery of programs that are in direct support of federal policy objectives, including
legal aid, youth justice services and Aboriginal Courtwork program.
Financial Resources (in millions of dollars)
Planned Spending
Authorities
Actual Spending
429.6
432.8
408.3
Planned
Actual
Difference
363
342
-21
Human Resources (in full-time equivalents)
For fiscal year 2007–08, the Justice policies, laws and programs activity focused on two key priorities:
ensuring an effective and accessible justice system and protecting Canadian communities.
5
20
Program Activity A1 — Justice policies, laws and programs — combines the previous Program Activities A1 (Developing policies and laws) and A2 (Developing and implementing programs). Please see the PAA Crosswalk
on page 11 of this report.
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
1. Criminal Justice Program
The Criminal Justice Program is central to the Government of Canada’s priority of Tackling
Crime and Strengthening the Security of Canadians. The breadth of criminal law issues for
which the Department maintains the capacity to support the government in its efforts to
tackle crime and strengthen the security of communities is extensive. Over the reporting period
(April 1, 2007 to March 31, 2008) the Department has supported the government in developing,
introducing and enacting timely legislative reforms related to criminal law, including:
• Restricting conditional sentences.
• Enacting mandatory penalties for firearms offences, reformed the dangerous offender’s
regime and imposed a reverse onus at bail for serious firearms offences.
• Increasing the age of consent.
• Enhancing investigative tools including the expansion of DNA sampling of offenders.
• Proposing mandatory penalties for drug offences.
• Proposing new offences to address identity theft.
• Strengthening the law to address impaired driving.
• Strengthening measures to hold youth more accountable for criminal activities.
• Enacting reforms to the Criminal Code to strengthen sentencing measures, improve
criminal procedure and clarify court-related language rights provisions.
Criminal law reform is not simply measured by the tabling of legislation for Parliament’s
consideration, but as well in the extensive work that goes into the development of reform
options and the support for legislative proposals once developed. In this regard, the Program is
heavily involved in coordinating and leading consultations with provinces and territories as
well as other stakeholders on criminal law reforms; preparing Cabinet briefings and
Memoranda to Cabinet; developing detailed background communications materials and
briefing books for bills; providing detailed briefings to senior officials, Ministers and staff to
support legislative reform proposals; and preparing the Minister and staff throughout all stages
of the legislative process in both Chambers of Parliament as well as appearances before House
and Senate Committees.
In pursuit of the Department’s ongoing priority to protect Canadian communities, the Criminal
Justice Program was actively engaged in four areas: safety and security initiatives, youth criminal
justice issues, addressing the concerns of victims of crime and pursuing international criminal
justice partnerships.
Department of Justice 21
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Safety and Security
The Department has been working with partner departments to modernize Canada’s laws,
including the Criminal Code, to address new technologies and support international
commitments in the environment of new technologies. This initiative will give police needed
and appropriate tools to investigate modern crimes, especially those committed via computer
systems, including child pornography, drug trafficking and organized crime. It also supports the
government’s commitment to enhance public safety and national security, secure the Canadian
border and ensure hemispheric security in the Americas.
The Department is also leading the implementation of the interdepartmental National AntiDrug Strategy. The Strategy is a collaborative effort involving the Department of Justice, Public
Safety Canada and Health Canada. The departments are working together to establish policies
and programs that prevent illicit drug use, treat those with illicit drug dependencies, and
combat the production and distribution of illicit drugs.
The Department directly supported the Government of Canada’s Tackling Crime agenda during
2007–08 with the development of several bills, of which seven were tabled in the House or
Senate (and one of which merged five bills that died on the Order Paper from the previous
Session of Parliament). The Department also provided the Government with extensive advice
and support in preparing responses to over 60 Private Members Bills and Motions as well as
with respect to other legislative and regulatory initiatives.
In addition to the government legislation, the Department supported the participation of the
Minister, Deputy Minister and the Senior Associate Deputy Minister at various international
fora on criminal justice issues, including the Commonwealth Law Ministers and Senior Officers
Meeting; the 10th Canada–United States Cross-Border Crime Forum; the G8 Justice and Home
Affairs Ministerial meeting; the Meeting of Ministers of Justice or of Ministers or Attorneys
General of the Americas (REMJA), held under the auspices of the Organization of American
States; and the Ministerial Forum on Organized Crime.
Results Achieved:
• Developed and supported the passage of Bill C-2 (now S.C. 2008, c.6) (Tackling Violent
Crime Act), which reintroduced many proposed reforms that died on the Order Paper at
prorogation (September 2007). Bill C-2 enacts mandatory penalties of imprisonment for
firearms offences, increases the age of consent, strengthens the law governing dangerous
offenders and long-term offenders, imposes a reverse onus for bail for firearms offences,
and strengthens the law governing impaired driving (whether by alcohol or drugs).
• Supported the passage of Bill C-9, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (conditional
sentence of imprisonment) (now S.C. 2007, c. 12). The amendments, which restrict the
availability of conditional sentences, were proclaimed into force on December 1, 2007.
• Reintroduced former Bill C-23, An Act to Amend the Criminal Code (criminal procedure,
language of the accused, sentencing and other amendments) as Bill C-13 (now S.C. 2008,
c. 18. ) and supported its passage by the House of Commons and Senate.
• Developed Bill C-26, An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and to
make consequential amendments to other Acts.
• Developed Bill C-27, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (Identity theft and related misconduct)
which received First Reading in the House of Commons on November 21, 2007.
22
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
• Prepared the Annual Reports of the Attorney General of Canada under the Anti-terrorism Act.
• Prepared the Government Response to the House of Commons Subcommittee recommendations
on the Anti-terrorism Act, which was tabled in the House of Commons on July 18, 2007.
• Developed Bill S-3, An Act to Amend the Criminal Code (investigative hearing and
recognizance with conditions) and supported the development of Bill C-3, An Act to amend
the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (certificate and special advocate) and make a
consequential amendment to another Act.
• Completed a summative evaluation of the Department of Justice Public Safety and
Anti-terrorism (PSAT) Initiative in June 2007 which concluded that the program was
effective. For more information, please see:
http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/eval/rep-rap/07/psat-spat/sum-som/index.html.
• Saw six Justice bills receive Royal Assent: C-26, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (criminal
interest rate) received Royal Assent on May 3, 2007 as S.C. 2007, c.9; C-9, An Act to amend
the Criminal Code (conditional sentence of imprisonment) received Royal Assent on
May 31, 2007 as 2007, c.12; C-48, An Act to amend the Criminal Code in order to implement
the United Nations Convention against Corruption, received Royal Assent on May 31, 2007
as S.C.2007, c.13; C-18, An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to DNA Identification,
received Royal Assent on June 22, 2007, as S.C.2007, c.22; C-59, An Act to amend the
Criminal Code (unauthorized recording of a movie), received Royal Assent on June 22, 2007
as S.C.2007, c.28; and C-2, Tackling Violent Crime Act, received Royal Assent on
February 28, 2008 as S.C. 2008, c.6.
Youth Justice
The Department of Justice funds activities designed to review policies and laws and develop
options for policy, program and legislative reform to achieve a fairer and more effective youth
justice system that responds to emerging youth criminal justice issues. During 2007–08, the
Department provided discretionary grants and contribution funding to provinces, territories,
nongovernmental organizations, Aboriginal organizations and youth justice stakeholders to
respond to emerging issues and contribute to achieving a fairer and more effective youth
justice system.
Specific areas of focus included pilot projects dealing with bail supervision programs and
chronic offenders, and strategies for addressing youth involvement with guns, gangs and
drugs. A total of 15 new projects targeting youth in conflict and involved in gun, gang and drug
activities were supported through discretionary funds. The majority of the projects funded were
for pilot programs responding to youth in conflict with the law and at risk of being involved or
already involved in gun, gang and drug activities in order to promote the making of “smart
choices” through community-based educational, cultural, sporting and vocational opportunities.
These projects included mentoring programs, employment and pro-social skills development
programs, after-custody plans and support programs for youth with FASD involved in gangs,
Aboriginal mentoring and cultural awareness programs, and a specialized program for female
youth who are in conflict with the law and involved in gangs.
Aside from project funding, the Department facilitated the sharing of best practices and raised
awareness of emerging justice issues pertaining to youth involved in gangs through a number
of roundtables/forums with youth justice stakeholders from across the country.
Department of Justice 23
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
In addition, the Department continued to provide financial support to the provinces and
territories for a range of youth justice services supporting federal youth justice policy objectives.
New five-year agreements were also offered to the provinces and territories to assist them in
providing the specialized services required for the assessment and treatment of serious violent
offenders with mental health issues.
Results Achieved:
• Co-chaired the federal/provincial/territorial (FPT) Pre-trial Detention Working Group.
The group met several times in person and held 35 teleconferences.
• Saw Bill C-25 introduced on November 19, 2007, to amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act
(YCJA) by adding deterrence and denunciation as sentencing principles and strengthening
pre-trial detention provisions for youth who pose a risk to public safety.
• Supported the October 9, 2007, announced comprehensive review of the YCJA and its
launch through a February 15, 2008, meeting of FPT Attorneys General.
• Completed negotiations and made a formal offer for the new five-year financial agreements
(2008–2013) under the Intensive Rehabilitative Custody and Supervision (IRCS) Program
issued February 13, 2008.
• Supported 15 new projects targeting youth involved in gun, gang and drug activities.
The value of these projects for 2007–08 was $1,668,130.
• Provided financial support under the Youth Justice Services Funding Program so that
provinces and territories could support policies and programs in high priority areas and
innovative youth justice approaches.
Victims of Crime
The Department of Justice coordinates an overall federal Victims of Crime Initiative including
all relevant federal legislation and programs within the Justice Canada mandate. The
Department works with the provinces and territories to develop policy and projects aimed at
enhancing the role of the victim in the criminal justice system and achieving a better balance
between the rights of victims and offenders.
In 2007–08 the Department continued to work with the Federal Provincial Territorial Working
Group on Victims of Crime, the Victim Advisory Committee and other partners to identify and
respond to existing and emerging victim issues. Through this work the Department has been
able to implement strategies to measure the effect of changes to the Criminal Code and Canada
Evidence Act to facilitate the testimony of young and other vulnerable witnesses as well as the
effectiveness of other victim-related Criminal Code provisions such as restitution, victim impact
statements and victim surcharge. As such, the Department implemented two new programs in
2007–08 to improve the experience of victims of crime:
• Northern Program to increase the capacity of victim service providers in the three
territories. Under this program salary dollars were provided for four new Crown Witness
Coordinators (CWCs) and a CWC training event was delivered.
• Victims of Crime Abroad Program provides training to consular officers and offices about
victim issues, funding and support available through the Victims Fund. In 2007–08, four
training sessions were delivered by the Policy Centre for Victim Issues (PCVI) to Foreign
Affairs consular staff on new funding for Canadians victimized abroad.
24
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
The Department, through contributions managed under the Victims Fund, also provides
assistance to the provinces and territories to assist in implementing victim-related Criminal
Code provisions. In 2007–08 significant enhancements to the Victims Fund were implemented,
increasing the Fund from approximately $2 million per year to $7.75 million per year. The new
resources were used for several purposes:
• to provide financial assistance to Canadians victimized abroad;
• to expand support for registered victims to have a support person attend National Parole Board hearings with them;
• to increase support for victims in northern community justice committees; and
• to increase resources for provincial and territorial government partners to increase services
to victims.
Results Achieved:
• Chaired and led the work with the FPT WG on Victims of Crime and other partners to
identify and respond to existing and emerging victim issues.
• Continued to implement the existing and ongoing mandate of the Federal Victims Strategy
which includes law reform and policy development, and assistance to provinces with the
implementation of amendments to the Criminal Code and development of tools to measure
the effect of such amendments.
• Planned and sponsored the second annual NVCAW in April 2007 which included a one-day
symposium to launch the week.
• Developed models for and supported the establishment of the Office of the Federal
Ombudsman for Victims of Crime, established effective relationships with the Federal
Ombudsman for Victims of Crime, and coordinated responses to the Ombudsman’s
inquiries and recommendations.
• Provided financial support to 410 victims and 75 support persons to attend National Parole
Board hearings (totalling $323,974). More registered victims attended NPB hearings in
2007–08 (461) than in 2006–07 (409).
• Provided funding for grants ($254,394) and contribution agreements ($2,590,935) to a wide
base of stakeholders. The projects and activities funded in 2007–08 included training events,
program evaluation, research and networking.
• Provided $733,989 to provincial and territorial governments to implement legislation to
benefit victims and to advance the Canadian Statement of Basic Principles of Justice for
Victims of Crime.
• Completed the mid-term evaluation, which found that the Victims of Crime Initiative is
on track to meet program objectives.
• Surveyed Victims Fund recipients to assess impact. Victims of crime who received funding
reported reduced financial hardship and an increased willingness to participate in and an
overall improved experience with the criminal justice process.
Department of Justice 25
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
International Criminal Justice
Globalization and developments in technologies have led to a rapid increase in transnational
crime that threatens the security of Canadians. Domestic means alone cannot effectively deal
with these transnational criminal activities. The need for a coordinated international response
has required the Department of Justice to advance Canadian interests in the development of
global anti-crime and terrorism measures, and to assist other countries with domestic crime
problems that can affect regional security and stability and the safety of Canadians at home
and abroad.
The participation of Justice officials in intergovernmental bodies over the past year has
expanded the capacity and knowledge base for criminal law policy development in Canada,
articulated Canadian knowledge and values internationally, and served Canada’s global
interests in preventing and suppressing crime, while promoting the rule of law, human rights
and sustainable development principles.
Results Achieved:
• Participated at the International Civil Aviation Organization in the ongoing development
of two draft protocols to amend the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of
Aircraft and the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil
Aviation and was involved in the ongoing negotiation of a bilateral agreement with the
United States concerning integrated cross-border maritime law enforcement.
• Participated in the development and delivery of a report to the United Nations Commission
on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice on the subject of transnational economic fraud
and identity-related crime.
• Participated in the 17th session of the United Nations Commission on Crime Prevention
and Criminal Justice, which adopted two resolutions introduced by Canada on “Fraud
and identity-related crime” and on “Information-gathering instrument in relation to
UN standards and norms in crime prevention and criminal justice.”
• Supported Bill C-48 (An Act to amend the Criminal Code in order to implement the United
Nations Convention against Corruption), which received Royal Assent on May 31, 2007.
• Participated in the Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking, a UN initiative to coordinate
the global fight on human trafficking on the basis of the United Nations Protocol to Prevent,
Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons especially Women and Children.
• Led or participated in the ongoing work of mechanisms that have been created to follow
up on the implementation of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption, the
Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business
Transactions (OECD Convention), the United Nations Convention against Transnational
Organized Crime (UNTOC), and its relevant protocols, the United Nations Convention
Against Corruption (UNCAC), and has been involved in the work of the Financial Action
Task Force (FATF) with respect to money laundering and terrorist financing, as well as with
efforts to prepare the terms of reference for a review mechanism for the UNCAC.
• Participated in the Group of Experts, which was established to develop a sample format for
the voluntary provision of supplementary information in respect of the UNTOC and the
UNCAC and to explore all possibilities of using modern information technology to facilitate
such reporting.
26
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
• Delivered technical assistance through the Organization of American States (OAS) on cyber
crime in the spring of 2008.
• Funded and assisted in the organization and delivery of training to the OAS / Ministers of
Justice or Attorneys General of the Americas (REMJA) Working Group on Mutual Legal
Assistance and Extradition in March 2008.
• Participated in the Criminal and Legal Affairs Experts Sub-Group of the G8 Roma/Lyon
Anti-Crime and Terrorism Groups, including playing a leadership role promoting work
to address identity theft.
• Participated in several Ministerial meetings that promoted international cooperation in the
fight against transnational organized crime and terrorism, including the Canada-US Cross
Border Crime Forum (Quebec City) and the 2007 Meeting of G8 Ministers of Justice and the
Interior (Germany).
2. Family Justice Program
Family law is an area of shared constitutional jurisdiction. The Constitution Act, 1867, gives
Parliament the power over “marriage and divorce” in s. 91(26) while the provincial legislatures
are given the power over “the solemnization of marriage in the province” in s. 92(12), “property
and civil rights” in s. 92(13) and the “administration of justice in the province” in s. 92(14).
The Family Justice Program is responsible for legal and strategic policy advice and litigation
support services with respect to the Divorce Act, the Civil Marriage Act and with respect to
the two pieces of federal support enforcement legislation: the Family Orders and Agreements
Enforcement Assistance Act (FOAEAA) and the Garnishment, Attachment and Pension Diversion
Act (GAPDA). The Program is also responsible for a component of the Family Violence Initiative
and coordinates policy work and research related to provisions in the Criminal Code.
To carry out its mandate, the Program conducts policy analysis and provides advice to senior
management and the Minister on most legal issues related to families and children. The Program
acts as a centre for family law and family violence expertise to all government departments,
provinces and territories. In litigated cases relating to family law it provides advice and
precedents to litigators, thus reducing time spent on preparing pleadings. It also provides
advice in cases with a family law component, such as immigration or income tax matters.
The Program administers the Family Law Assistance Services (FLAS) to support the Divorce Act,
FOAEAA and GAPDA. The Department operates the Central Registry of Divorce Proceedings
(CRDP), a national registry service that contains all applications for divorce in Canada since
1968. The Registry exists to prevent duplicate divorce proceedings and is used to resolve
possible jurisdictional disputes that may arise under the Divorce Act. Following verification of
jurisdiction, the Department issues a clearance certificate to the appropriate family court to
allow the divorce application to proceed.
The Department also delivers direct federal support enforcement services to the provincial and
territorial maintenance enforcement programs (MEPs) and acts as a “gateway” for the MEPs to
access other federal departments. Under GAPDA, the Department garnishes federal employee
wages and/or pensions when they are in default, in collaboration with Public Works and
Government Services Canada (PWGSC), among other federal departments.
Department of Justice 27
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Under FOAEAA, the Department searches federal information databanks to locate support
debtors and child abductors, intercepts federal funds and denies federal licences, including
passports. These services are essential to those who are owed support and to provincial and
territorial MEPs responsible for the enforcement of support obligations.
Key activities during 2007–08 included the preparation and adoption of amendments to federal
family law regulations, including: an amendment to the Federal Child Support Guidelines with
updated child support tables; another in response to the new government benefit — the
Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB); and an amendment to the Family Support Orders and
Agreements Garnishment Regulations to add the Apprenticeship Incentive Grant as a garnishable
federal fund that might otherwise be paid to individuals who are in default of their family
support obligations.
The Minister of Justice entered into a Memorandum of Agreement under section 25.1 of the
Divorce Act with the province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Agreements were made the
previous year with Manitoba and Prince Edward Island. With these agreements, the provincial
recalculation services will be in a position to recalculate child support amounts ordered under
the Divorce Act. As a result, children of divorced parents in these provinces will be able to
benefit from recalculation, as do children whose parents have separated or never married.
The Department also updated, in collaboration with the provinces and territories, an “Inventory
of Government-based Family Justice Services” that is posted on the departmental Internet site
(http://canada.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/pad-rpad/res/fjis-rsgjf/brows-fure.asp). The Inventory is a
user-friendly tool that is accessible to all Canadians with the objective of enabling an individual
in any province or territory to obtain information concerning the government-based family
justice services in his or her jurisdiction and elsewhere in Canada.
The Department’s Child Support (http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/sup/) and Parenting After
Divorce (http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/pad/) websites provide useful and highly soughtafter information for Canadian families. During 2007–08 there were 181,441 downloads of
research reports on topics of child support, custody, access and enforcement of support and
1,188,588 downloads of public legal education materials such as the Step-by-Step Guide to the
Federal Guidelines, the provincial or territorial Federal Child Support Tables and Divorce Law:
Questions and Answers. As well, during the reporting period, the Department released the
following research reports: Resources for Youth Undergoing the Separation or Divorce of their
Parents (R. Birnbaum), and Listening to Youths about their Needs and Preferences for Information
Relating to Parental Separation and/or Divorce and Research on Resources for Children and
Youths Undergoing Parental Separation and Divorce: A Literature Review (R. Birnbaum).
Along with child support activities, the Department developed policy and program options in
relation to family justice and elder abuse; drafted the government response to the Senate report
on children and tabled it in the House of Commons; and led a Canadian delegation that
contributed to the successful negotiation of the new Hague Convention on the International
Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance.
The Department also provided input to international discussions on women’s and children’s
rights, particularly in the context of family violence including the UNGA 62 resolutions and the
UN High-level segment on Children (A World Fit for Children Follow-up) and provided input to
the government response to the UN Study on Violence Against Children.
28
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Legislative initiatives on this front included support for the government in the consideration of
Senate Bill S-209, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children), as well as drafting
the family law and family violence portions of the INAC-led Bill C-47, An Act respecting family
homes situated on First Nation reserves and matrimonial interests or rights in or to structures
and lands situated on those reserves.
Results Achieved:
• Signed 15 Child-centred Family Justice Fund contribution agreements to support and
promote the continuing development of provincial and territorial family justice services.
• Completed field audits of Prince Edward Island, Quebec and Ontario agreements.
The audits found that provinces were implementing the agreements appropriately.
• Provided funding for three pilot projects, eight public legal education and information
(PLEI) organizations and professional training projects, and five projects under Article 41
of the Official Languages Act.
• Prepared a “Supporting Families through Separation and Divorce” strategy.
• Published “What Happens Next? Information for Kids about Separation and Divorce.”
• Disseminated, through the Family Children and Youth section (FCY), 35,375 copies of the
children’s booklet: What Happens Next?; 15,392 copies of Divorce Law: Questions and
Answers; 47,627 copies of Step by Step; 55,800 Child Support Tables; 5000 Calendars for
Children; and 2000 Informational Postcards.
• Received approximately 10,000 calls to the FCY Information Line in 2007–08.
• Facilitated 1,900,168 website downloads of research reports and PLEI materials from
FCY’s websites.
• Garnished and distributed $121,698,141 on behalf of provinces and territories, to Canadian
families to satisfy child and spousal support obligations in 2007–08, an increase of almost
$2 million from the previous year.
• Received and processed 10,794 applications for suspension or denial of passports and
federal licences held by debtors in persistent support arrears. In addition, DOJ received and
processed 25,858 tracing applications from provinces and territories seeking to find support
debtors, which represents an increase of more than 1,000 applications from the previous year.
3. Access to Justice Program
Access to justice initiatives represent an important structural support to an efficient and
effective justice system, and as such underpin public confidence in the justice system.
Many of the specific program sub-activities under the broad umbrella of Access to Justice
Programs unfold within areas of shared jurisdiction for the administration of justice with
the provinces and territories, reflecting our shared interests in the overall sustainability
of the Canadian justice system.
Department of Justice 29
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Many of the areas within the Canadian judicial system require the federal government to play a
significant, influential, if not direct fundamental role. For example, a series of constitutional,
quasi-constitutional and legislative provisions govern the use of English and French within the
justice system in Canada. At the federal level, this legal framework is circumscribed by section
133 of the Constitution Act, 1867, subsection 19(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms, the Official Languages Act and the linguistic provisions of the Criminal Code, s. 530
and 530.1, which allow an accused to be tried in the official language of his or her choice.
As well, under Part VII, Section 41 of the Official Languages Act the federal government is committed
to promoting linguistic duality by enhancing the vitality of official language minority communities
and by promoting the use of both official languages in Canadian society.
Legal Aid
The provision of criminal legal aid is integral to the effective and appropriate functioning of
Canada’s criminal justice system. For more than 35 years, the Department of Justice has
provided funding in support of criminal legal aid service delivery by the provinces and criminal
and civil legal aid by the territories through contribution agreements. Legal aid funding for the
territories is provided through Access to Justice Services Agreements that also integrate funding
Aboriginal Courtwork and public legal education and information services. By providing these
resources, over the reporting period, the federal government:
• maintained its policy role in ensuring that the justice system is efficient, fair, relevant
and accessible;
• supported the provision of legal aid services to economically disadvantaged Canadians
who are facing serious criminal charges pursuant to the Criminal Code, the Extradition Act
or the Fugitive Persons Act;
• supported the provision of legal aid services to young people involved in proceedings relating to the Youth Criminal Justice Act; and
• supported the provision of legal aid services to immigrants and refugees.
During 2007–08, the Terms and Conditions for the Legal Aid Program were renewed for the period
2007–08 to 2011–12 and an Accountability, Risk and Audit Framework (ARAF) was prepared for
the current five-year period of the Program’s Terms and Conditions. The ARAF will support the
Program’s efforts to strengthen accountability for achieving objectives; improve program
performance through results-focused management; actively monitor and manage the risks
of the Program; and develop and use information for decision making.
Results Achieved:
• Signed 10 legal aid agreements (provincial) for the two-year period 2007–2009.
• Signed 38 Court-Ordered Council in Federal Prosecution agreements and 7 Public Security
and Anti-terrorism (PSAT) legal aid agreements.
• Played the lead role in coordinating the FPT Permanent Working Group on Legal Aid as well
as Legal Aid sub-committees.
• Assisted the Permanent Working Group on Legal Aid in holding seven meetings and five
teleconferences on legal aid issues and helped create a Criminal Legal Aid Business Case
and a distribution formula document.
30
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
• Conducted a routine audit of New Brunswick Legal Aid programs, and conducted a preliminary
study for an audit of Ontario Legal Aid programs to assist in future audit planning.
Access to Justice in Both Official Languages
The Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Support Fund provides financial support to
projects that contribute to improving the capacity of justice professionals (judges, lawyers,
court staff, translators, etc) to provide services in both official languages. As well the Fund
finances projects for the development of legal and linguistic tools to support legal professionals
of both linguistic minority communities. These activities improve the capacity of the justice
system to comply with the language provisions of the Criminal Code.
The Support Fund also supports advisory committees, which aim to increase awareness among
the justice community about minority language rights and obligations to provide services to
both English and French linguistic communities as well as terminology language training,
research projects and pilot projects that contribute to increasing the capacity of the justice
system to offer services in both official languages.
The Support Fund, in collaboration with the University of Ottawa, facilitated the creation of a
pilot project ending in March 2008 that saw the development of a master’s program in legal
translation. Of particular note, three of the graduates of this program have been hired to work
at the Supreme Court of Canada, which now has the full capacity to meet its translation needs.
This has a direct impact on the Supreme Court’s capacity to offer services in both official
languages in a timely fashion. This project accounted for $64,535 in 2007–08.
The Support Fund provides funding for French legal terminology language training for Frenchspeaking legal professionals, including judges, lawyers, court staff and translators. The capacity
of these professionals to provide services in French has a direct correlation with improved
access to services in both official languages. Four projects funded in 2007–08 totalling
approximately $242,000 provided training to at least 120 justice professionals.
One language training project worth noting that had an impact on the capacity of the justice
system to comply with the language provisions of the Criminal Code was the French legal
terminology language training provided to judges in Alberta. The project, which was supported
in partnership with Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Alberta, has enabled the
Provincial Court of Alberta to broaden the scope of its operations in French with 20 trials and
proceedings being heard in French — including eight outside of Edmonton or Calgary from
April 1, 2007, to March 31, 2008. This language training project was in support of a broader
Alberta project that will see the development, implementation and operation of an itinerant
Francophone Bench. It must be added that all judges involved in the project have had an
opportunity to preside at least over one trial in French.
The Summative Evaluation for the Support Fund, completed in May 2007, revealed that the
activities funded by the Support Fund have contributed to improving access to justice services
in both official languages by increasing the capacity of actors in the justice system to offer those
services. The Support Fund has enabled associations of French-speaking jurists to carry out
their mandate more effectively, has contributed to the development of jurilinguistic tools and
to professional development for legal professionals, and has brought together a variety of
stakeholders so that they could coordinate their efforts. As well, the leading stakeholders have
been made aware of the needs that exist in relation to access to justice and are involved in
identifying and implementing activities in that regard.
Department of Justice 31
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Results Achieved:
• Collaborated with a Canadian university to support the development of a master’s program
in legal translation.
• Provided funding to promote access to French legal terminology language training.
4. Aboriginal Justice Program
The Department of Justice develops and implements policy, laws and programs aimed at
addressing the needs of Aboriginal people in the justice system. It has been widely documented
that Aboriginal people continue to be over-represented in the Canadian criminal justice system,
both as victims and accused. The needs of Aboriginal people related to culture, economic
position and/or social circumstances must be taken into account to make the system more
relevant and effective. The Department takes specific measures to respond to the
over-representation of Aboriginal Canadians in the justice system through initiatives
such the Aboriginal Justice Strategy (AJS) and the Aboriginal Courtwork Program (ACW).
Aboriginal Justice Strategy
The AJS strengthens the justice system by enabling Aboriginal communities to have increased
involvement in the local administration of justice and by providing timely and effective
alternatives to mainstream justice processes in appropriate circumstances. The renewed
Aboriginal Justice Strategy has been implemented. All status quo funding agreements have
been renewed and in some cases enhanced funding was allocated. In 2007–08, the AJS cofunded, with the provinces and territories, community-based justice programs and capacitybuilding projects across Canada, including diversion programs, sentencing circles or panels,
family and civil mediation and other justice activities in Aboriginal communities.
In November 2007, the FPT Ministers endorsed a Declaration on Aboriginal Justice to foster
intergovernmental cooperation to make the Canadian justice system more responsive to the
unique challenges facing Aboriginal Canadians — discrimination, lack of culturally appropriate
process and high rates of incarceration. In addition, the Aboriginal Affairs Portfolio participated
in the creation of the Federal Committee to Improve Collaboration on Justice and Safety in
Aboriginal Communities as an interdepartmental body to foster a more integrated, horizontal
and accountable service delivery framework for federal initiatives across the Aboriginal justice
spectrum.
The Summative Evaluation for the AJS, finalized in April 2007, includes a study on the impact of
AJS programs on rates of re-offending among Aboriginal offenders. This recidivism study found
that offenders who participated in AJS-funded programs are approximately half as likely to
re-offend as are offenders who did not participate in these programs, and that this impact is
sustained over time.
Results Achieved:
• Co-funded 90 community-based justice programs serving approximately 400 Aboriginal
communities, and funded 19 capacity-building projects across Canada.
32
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Aboriginal Courtwork Program
Through the Aboriginal Courtwork Program, the Department increases access to justice for all
Aboriginal people who come into contact with the criminal justice system by ensuring they
receive fair, equitable, culturally sensitive treatment. The Department contributes funding to
support Aboriginal Courtwork services in the provinces through contribution agreements and
in the territories through the Access to Justice Services Agreements. The Aboriginal Courtwork
Program is the only ongoing national justice contribution program available to all Aboriginal
people (adult and youth) regardless of status and residency. The ACW serves almost 70,000
Aboriginal people each year.
The Formative Evaluation of the ACW was completed in 2007. Among its key findings were that
Aboriginal Courtworkers have successfully established relationships between community
justice programs and the formal justice system. 6
The Summative Evaluation of the Program was carried out during 2007–08. Among its key
findings were that there is a strong need for the ACW Program, which is broadly viewed as
achieving its objectives (ensuring that Aboriginal people in contact with the justice system
receive fair, equitable and culturally sensitive treatment). As well, the evaluation noted that the
ACW Program has strengthened the relationship between the Aboriginal community and the
formal justice system and that it enables justice officials to become more aware of cultural
traditions, to take relevant court decisions into account and to consider alternative measures.
Results Achieved:
• Renewed the ACW Program terms and conditions for five years, from 2008 to 2013.
• Negotiated new five-year contribution agreements with the participating provinces
effective 2008 to 2013.
• Undertook three audits of provincial programs and all three provinces were found to be
implementing the agreements appropriately.
• Held a National Training Forum in Edmonton, Alberta, in February 2008 for all Aboriginal
Courtworkers. Over 250 Courtworkers from the 11 participating jurisdictions attended the
event. The Forum evaluation forms indicated that over 90 per cent of the participants were
satisfied with the training.
• Conducted a National Client Survey of the Aboriginal Courtwork Program involving
900 clients. Findings show that over 90 per cent of Aboriginal Courtwork Program clients
were satisfied with the Aboriginal Courtwork services they received.
6
The Aboriginal Court Work Formative Evaluation is posted on the Department’s website at
http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/eval/rep-rap/07/acw-papa/index.html.
Department of Justice 33
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
5. Private International and Public Law Program
The Minister of Justice has policy responsibilities for a number of public law statutes including,
but not limited to Access to Information Act, Privacy Act, Judges Act, Canadian Human Rights Act,
and statutes constituting the federal courts. In addition, the Prime Minister delegated the
responsibilities for the following organizations to the Minister of Justice:
• Supreme Court of Canada
• Tax Court of Canada
• Federal Courts
• Information Commissioner of Canada
• Privacy Commissioner of Canada
• Federal Commissioner for Judicial Affairs
• Judicial Compensation and Benefits Commission
• Canadian Human Rights Commission
• Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Under this program activity, the Department provides support to the Minister in relation to his
portfolio responsibilities for the Offices of the Information and Privacy Commissioners,
Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
In the domain of international private law, the federal government, not provincial governments,
has the authority to negotiate, sign and ratify international treaties by virtue of a Crown Prerogative
embedded in the Constitution. Canada is an active and respected member of the Hague
Conference and Unidroit because it recognized that Canadians benefit from Canada’s
participation in international fora where harmonized or uniform laws were being developed.
The Department’s activities in the area of private international law are guided by the support
provided by a Federal-Provincial-Territorial Advisory Group on Private International Law.
The Canadian judiciary and courts is a core federal responsibility pursuant to sections 96 to 101
of the Constitution Act, 1867. The Government of Canada is constitutionally required to appoint
and pay the judges of the superior courts (including the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal
Court of Appeal, the Federal Court and the Tax Court of Canada). The superior court judiciary is
also a core constitutional responsibility for the federal government. Moreover, the Minister of
Justice is the interlocutor between the Executive Branch of government and the judiciary,
which means that the Minister ensures that contact between the two branches of government is
appropriate (respectful of judicial independence) and that the interests of the courts are
represented to the Executive.
34
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Program Activity A2: Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime
Financial Resources (in millions of dollars)
Planned Spending
Authorities
Actual Spending
1.5
1.5
0.7
Planned
Actual
Difference
9
6
-3
Human Resources (in full-time equivalents)
The Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime was established and an
Ombudsman appointed in 2007–08. The Office was established as an independent function that
reports directly to the Minister and is thus outside the Department’s governance framework.
The Department liaises with the Ombudsman’s Office and responds to all requests for
information in a timely manner. The first report from the Ombudsman is expected in 2008–09.
The Office raises awareness of the needs and concerns of victims in areas of federal
responsibility and provides an independent resource that addresses complaints of victims
about compliance with the provisions of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act that apply
to victims of offenders under federal supervision, and assists victims to access existing federal
programs and services. 7
7
The Federal Ombudsman reports directly to the Minister of Justice and tables his reports to Parliament through
the Minister. For further information regarding the Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of crime,
please consult http://www.victimsfirst.gc.ca/index.html.
Department of Justice 35
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Strategic Outcome II: A federal government that is supported by
effective and responsive legal services
Under the Department of Justice Act, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General provides legal
services to the federal government and its department and agencies. In particular, under s.4 of
the Act, the Minister is identified as the legal member of the Queen’s Privy Council responsible
for seeing that the administration of public affairs is in accordance with the law. Under s.5 of the
Act, the Attorney General is responsible for advising the heads of government departments on
all matters of law and for conducting all litigation for or against any federal department or
agency of the Crown in respect of any subject within the authority or jurisdiction of Canada.
There are two ongoing expected results 8 related to this strategic outcome:
• High-quality legal services and respect for the rule of law.
• Legal risks are anticipated, mitigated and effectively managed.
The Department seeks to attain this strategic outcome through one program activity —
Services to Government.
Program Activity B1: Services to Government
The Department provides an integrated suite of common legal services to individual
departments and agencies through functions related to the offices of the Attorney General and
the Minister of Justice. These services include the provision of legal advice, the drafting of
legislation and regulations, and the coordination and conduct of litigation to facilitate the work
of departments and agencies to meet their policy and programming priorities and advance the
overall objectives of the government.
The alignment of legal services to government priorities is achieved, in particular, through
annual joint Department of Justice and client department planning and prioritizing of the
provision of legal services and a shared understanding by both the Department and clients of
the impacts on legal risks. In addition, senior departmental officials regularly interact with their
colleagues in their client departments and in central agencies. As a result of these interactions,
adjustments are made from time to time to maintain focus on government priorities.
Financial Resources (in millions of dollars)
Planned Spending
Authorities
Actual Spending
286.6
299.6
277.2
Planned
Actual
Difference
3,768
3,891
123
Human Resources (in full-time equivalents)
8
36
Results from indicators listed in the “Tracking Performance” section of this document are aggregated to
demonstrate performance against expected results for Strategic Outcome II.
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Portfolio Structure for the Delivery of Legal Services to Government
As the government’s “law firm,” the Department of Justice structures the delivery of legal
services to government departments and agencies in a way that maximizes effectiveness in
serving our clients’ needs. To this end, the Department delivers services through five “portfolios”
— Aboriginal Affairs; Business and Regulatory Law; Central Agencies; Citizenship, Immigration
and Public Safety and the Tax Law Portfolio. Additionally, through a sixth “portfolio”, the Justice
Portfolio, the Department maintains specialized expertise in order to be a core resource for
federal government departments and the government as a whole on highly specialized areas
of the law, on litigation and on legislative and regulatory drafting.
Aboriginal Affairs Portfolio
The Aboriginal Affairs Portfolio provides legal, policy and strategic advice to federal government
departments on a wide spectrum of Aboriginal law issues related to federal Crown–Aboriginal
relations. This involves close collaboration with key partners in support of federal operations,
policies, programs and other initiatives on Aboriginal matters, including Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada and its associated departments and agencies (notably the Office of the Federal
Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians and the Office of the Indian Residential Schools
Resolution Canada).
Within the broad spectrum of Aboriginal law, federal counsel focus on key issues relevant to
government operations: fiduciary relationship of the Crown with Aboriginal people, Aboriginal
and treaty rights, Charter and other constitutional issues relating to Aboriginal peoples, resolution
of Aboriginal claims and historic grievances, and more broadly the role of the law in support of
the honour of the Crown and reconciliation between the Crown and Aboriginal Canadians.
Business and Regulatory Law Portfolio
The Business and Regulatory Law Portfolio has a very wide scope: it provides legal services to
all federal government departments and agencies whose mandates have in common a strong
regulatory or business law component. Legal services on strategic, operational and a broad
range of legal issues are provided through departmental legal service units located directly
within 21 client departments.
Counsel and paralegals in the Portfolio advise clients, help manage legal risks, conduct and
support cases in courts brought by or against the Crown and assist in the development of
regulations and legislation. Many of the Portfolio’s key clients maintain extensive national
presence and thus the Portfolio delivers services to regional client departments in most
provinces and territories through the network of departmental Regional Offices across Canada.
Central Agencies Portfolio
The Central Agencies Portfolio is responsible for the delivery of legal services to the Department
of Finance, the Treasury Board Secretariat, the Canada Public Service Agency, the Canada
School of Public Service, the Public Service Commission, the Office of the Superintendent of
Financial Institutions, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada, and
the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada. The Portfolio provides integrated legal advisory,
litigation and legislative drafting services in support of the government’s mandate with respect
to economic, fiscal, social, security, accountability, machinery of government, comptrollership,
human resources management and financial sector policies and programs.
Department of Justice 37
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
The Portfolio is also tasked with representing Treasury Board, the Public Service Commission,
deputy heads and separate agencies in labour and employment litigation before the Public
Service Labour Relations Board, the Public Service Staffing Tribunal, Appeals Officers under
Part II of the Canada Labour Code, the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal, the
Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal.
While the Legislative Services Branch is responsible for drafting government legislation, Central
Agencies Portfolio carries out some legislative and regulatory drafting related to tax legislation
and the tax aspects of federal Budget implementation bills.
Citizenship, Immigration and Public Safety Portfolio
The Citizenship, Immigration and Public Safety Portfolio was created to reflect the government
reorganization that took place on December 12, 2003 in response to the terrorist attacks of
September 11th, 2001. The Portfolio provides legal advisory, legislative and litigation services to
respond to client needs and requirements in the eight federal departments and agencies under
the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and the Minister of Public Safety.
The Portfolio works closely with client departments to ensure that legal resources are devoted
to client priorities. As such the Portfolio directly and indirectly supports two of the government’s
key priorities as identified in the Speech from the Throne: Tackling Crime and Strengthening
the Security of Canadians, and Providing Effective Economic Leadership for a Prosperous Future.
Additionally, the War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity Section is responsible for the
enforcement of Canada’s “No Safe Haven” policy. The Portfolio has also been called upon
extensively to support the government in relation to Commissions of Inquiry.
Tax Law Services Portfolio
The Tax Law Portfolio provides legal solutions to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) through a
network of 280 counsel in Tax Law offices located in CRA headquarters, Department of Justice
headquarters, and in Department of Justice Regional Offices (Halifax, Montreal, Ottawa,
Toronto, Winnipeg/Saskatoon, Edmonton, Vancouver). Over three-quarters of the Portfolio’s legal
services are provided in the Regional Offices. Approximately, 80 per cent of the work is litigation
in both the federal and provincial courts, while 20 per cent of the service is advisory in nature.
The Tax Law Portfolio supports the CRA in its ongoing operations and in meeting the
government’s key priorities as outlined in the Speech From the Throne, including Providing
Effective Economic Leadership for a Prosperous Future. Portfolio legal services for the CRA
include representing the Crown in all tax matters, such as appeals filed to the Courts by
taxpayers, as well as collection matters, EI /CPP insurability appeals, civil law suits and class
actions. Additionally, the Portfolio assists the CRA, through the provision of legal advice in
respect of corporate issues and all tax programs. Portfolio counsel provide legal advice as
members of the CRA’s work teams during the implementation of specific initiatives outlined
in the Government’s priorities, both tax and non-tax. In this regard, the Portfolio works in close
partnership with the CRA toward the development of amendments to tax-related legislation, the
articulation of fiscal policies and the administration of Canadian tax regimes. Portfolio lawyers
also work to ensure that fiscal laws are upheld, and that the CRA has the legal solutions it needs
to ensure taxpayers meet their obligations and to protect Canada’s revenue base.
38
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Justice Portfolio
The Justice Portfolio consists of three specialized groups within the Department: Public Law
Sector, Litigation Branch, and Legislative Services Branch. The Portfolio provides specialized
legal advisory, litigation and legislative services to all government departments and agencies
both directly and indirectly, by supporting the five other operational Department portfolios.
Some of the specialized areas of law for which the Portfolio provides legal advisory services
include administrative law, trade law, Constitutional and Charter law, and private and public
international law. The Portfolio also plays a key role in ensuring that legal and legal policy
advice in these complex areas of law address whole-of-government legal interests that
transcend the mandate of any one Minister or department.
Additionally, the Portfolio provides functional guidance, to ensure the highest quality of
representation in the courts and consistency of approach across the country in litigation by
or against the Crown. It does so through mechanisms including: the National Litigation
Committee, which ensures that the Attorney General’s submissions in court reflect the position
of the Government of Canada as a whole and not that of a single department on any issue;
formal Practice Directives, which set out the position to be adopted by counsel for the Attorney
General in specific areas and which define responsibilities of counsel; and the Supreme Court of
Canada Committee, which ensures that the oral and written arguments of the Attorney General
are of the highest possible quality. The Portfolio also handles litigation by or against the
Government in a wide range of issues including constitution, class actions, national security,
international legal assistance and extradition. The Portfolio contributes to the management
of legal risks to the Government by identifying risks, assessing and communicating them
appropriately, and aligning the required resources to correspond to the risk.
The Portfolio also coordinates legislative drafting (bills and regulations) in both official
languages and provides related advisory services to establish the legal framework for
government policies and programs. Bills and regulations are drafted to respect the Constitution,
be understandable and operate coherently and effectively with other related laws. The Portfolio
is also responsible for the publication of federal laws, notably an electronic consolidation of
Acts and regulations that is available on the Internet.
Finally, the Department’s involvement in the Public Security and Anti-terrorism (PSAT)
Initiative is managed within this Portfolio and includes legislative support and policy
development, legal advice and assistance, as well as prosecutions and civil litigation.
This also includes a new responsibility for the Attorney General: namely, the protection
of sensitive federal government information.
Regional Offices
Six Regional Offices — serving the North, British Columbia, the Prairies, Ontario, Quebec and
the Atlantic provinces — support the portfolio structure by offering services to clients and
handling litigation and legal advisory work locally. Approximately one-half of the Department’s
staff complement works in regional offices. Regional staff members are responsible for effectively
managing a large volume of litigation and advisory services on behalf of client departments.
They work closely with portfolio and policy colleagues to handle complex, high-profile cases.
During fiscal year 2007–08, approximately 76 per cent of active litigation files of varying
complexity were located in the regions and approximately 30 per cent of the advisory
inventory was managed in the Regions.
Department of Justice 39
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Tracking Performance
Over the course of the past year, the Department tracked three broad categories of measures
and indicators of our success in meeting Strategic Outcome II: A federal government that is
supported by effective and responsive legal services — representing the Crown’s interests to
enable government to attain its key priorities, managing our resources effectively, and
supporting other government departments with high-quality legal services.
1. Representing the Crown’s Interests to
Enable Government to Attain its Key Priorities
The alignment of legal services to enabling government priorities is achieved through joint planning
and priority setting by the Department of Justice and our client departments and agencies. This
approach is reinforced by a hybrid funding model whereby almost one-half of the Department’s
spending authorities related to the provision of legal services are derived from cost recoveries
jointly negotiated between the Department and client departments and agencies.
In essence, by virtue of the alignment to client priorities, the Department is indirectly involved
in supporting the five key Government of Canada priorities outlined in the Speech from the Throne 9:
• Tackling Crime and Strengthening the Security of Canadians
• Improving the Environment and the Health of Canadians
• Strengthening Canada’s Sovereignty and Place in the World
• Providing Effective Economic Leadership for a Prosperous Future
• Strengthening the Federation and our Democratic Institutions
Listing all of the initiatives and activities that the Department undertakes in enabling the
government to attain its priorities would be exhaustive. Nevertheless, the following examples
illustrate some of the Department’s efforts to support the Government of Canada’s priorities.
Tackling Crime and Strengthening the Security of Canadians
In the area of strengthening the security of Canadians, the Department has been very engaged
in a number of activities:
• supporting clients to fulfill national security and emergency management mandates
including the provision of legal services in relation to the Air India and Iacobucci
commissions of inquiry, implementation of the new security certificate provisions of
Bill C-3 and supporting emergency management initiatives such as planning for the
2010 Winter Olympics;
• supporting client departments’ efforts aimed at strengthening border security through
legislative and other means;
• assisting in the implementation of a new vision to achieve better public safety results
through parole and correction reforms; and
• providing legal support in efforts to enhance identity security in government documents
for temporary immigrants.
9
40
The complete text of the Speech from the Throne can be found at http://www.sft-ddt.gc.ca/eng/index.asp
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Improving the Environment and the Health of Canadians
The Department has provided critical support to the development and implementation of the
following environmental priorities:
• Clean Air Regulatory Agenda including the Regulatory Framework for Greenhouse Gases
and Air Pollutants and Accelerated Access to Renewable Fuels.
• Development of the Chemicals Management Plan.
• Measures to enhance environmental enforcement.
• Statutory Review of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999.
• Statutory Review of the Species at Risk Act.
The Department also worked closely with client departments on measures related to the Food
and Consumer Safety Action Plan — specifically the introduction in Parliament of Bill C-51,
An Act to amend the Food and Drugs Act and Bill C-52, the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act.
Strengthening Canada’s Sovereignty and Place in the World
In relation to the strengthening sovereignty and Canada’s place in the world, the Department
works closely to support the Department of National Defence with legal services directly relevant
to rebuilding the military’s capacity to participate in critical missions, including Afghanistan.
Providing Effective Economic Leadership for a Prosperous Future
With regard to providing economic leadership, the Department provides a range of legal advice
and support to the Minister of Finance including advice on legal and legislative implications of
proposed spending and taxation measures, and advice on a variety of social, tax and financial
sector policies and programs, such as the reduction of the GST and the governance and
management of the Employment Insurance Account. The Department also helps to coordinate
and prepare the Budget Implementation Bills and supports the Department of Finance in all
aspects of the Parliamentary process related to the implementation of the federal Budget Plan.
Strengthening the Federation and our Democratic Institutions
In relation to the strengthening the Federation, the Department has worked closely with client
departments to implement the government’s five-point plan for Aboriginal affairs 10 by:
• providing critical support to the implementation of the Residential schools resolution
settlement agreements across the country;
• assisting with the new Aboriginal economic development frameworks and working to
support the Mackenzie Gas Pipeline project in the North;
• supporting the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs in developing a Specific Claims
Action Plan in order to accelerate the settlement of specific claims (in the past year the
target of resolving 50 specific claims was met); and
• supporting the government to ensure human rights protection for members of on-reserve
communities (repeal of section 67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act).
10
The five-point plan was articulated by the Prime Minister to the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples in Halifax on November 7, 2007.
Department of Justice 41
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Comprehensive Delivery on the Government’s Legislative Agenda
One of the key mechanisms by which the Department actively supports the government in
pursuing its key priorities is through legislative and regulatory drafting services. In this vein, the
Department of Justice drafts all government legislation tabled in either the Senate or the House
of Commons. Over the course of 2007–08, the Department supported the government in
pursuing a comprehensive legislation agenda. Figure 1 below portrays the success of the
Department in delivering on the government’s legislative agenda.
Figure 1 – Delivering on the Government’s Legislative Agenda
Legislative Services Inventory
Number of bills tabled
Number of motions to amend drafted
Number of regulations stamped
for publication in Part I of
the Canada Gazette
Number of regulations published in
Part I of the Canada Gazette
Number of regulations stamped
for publication in Part II of
the Canada Gazette
Number of regulations published in
Part II of the Canada Gazette
The following factors are relevant to understanding year-to-year fluctuations in the legislative
services inventory:
• While the number of regulations published in Part II of the Canada Gazette has decreased,
the average size of these regulations increased, as evidenced by the slight increase in the
number of pages published in the 2007–08 fiscal year (3,465) as compared to that published
in the 2006–07 fiscal year (3,300). There is also an increasing complexity in some major
regulatory files. By way of examples, the Ontario Fisheries Regulations, the Federal Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Regulations, the Energy Efficiency Regulations, the Vessel
Operation Restriction Regulations, the Cargo Fumigation and Tackle Regulations, and the
Marine Personnel Regulations all represented very complex regulatory initiatives.
• With regard to the decline in the number of motions, a new session of Parliament and the
reintroduction of bills from the previous session meant that there were no amendments in
September and October and very few in December and January. In addition, in the two
previous fiscal years, there were certain bills which required numerous motions (e.g.,
Federal Accountability Act, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act, and First Nations Fiscal
and Statistical Management Act); this was not the case in the 2007-08 fiscal year.
42
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
2. Managing our Resources Effectively
to Meet Government of Canada Legal Needs
An important means for tracking the effective management of resources is through ongoing
monitoring of workloads. In this vein, a large portion of the Department’s work is devoted to
managing litigation files — thus for example, just over one-half (54 per cent) of the actively
managed files in the departmental inventory for 2007–08 were litigation files while 40 per cent
were advisory files and the remaining 6 per cent were legislative files (see Figure 2).
Figure 2 – Distribution of Legal Files by File Type and Level of Effort
Distribution of Legal Files by File Type
Total number of active legal files
worked on in 2007-08: 69,697
Distribution of Legal Files by Level of Effort
Total level of effort dedicated
to providing legal services:
2,927,165 professional hours
There is a high correlation between the volume of files and the levels of resources devoted to
managing them as demonstrated by the fact that litigation files accounted for 50 per cent of the
total level of effort devoted by legal counsel to substantive files, while advisory files accounted
for 41 per cent and legislative files accounted for about 9 per cent.
As the government’s law firm, the Department of Justice finds that the demand for services is
varied and covers a broad range of areas of practice. To meet demand, the Department delivers
services through the portfolio structure across the country. Broken down by Portfolio, an
overview of workloads reveals that a large portion (42% of file inventory) of the Department’s
work is in support of the 21 client departments that comprise the Business and Regulatory
Law (BRL) Portfolio (see Figure 3). About one-fifth of the file inventory is in the Citizenship,
Immigration and Public Safety (CIPS) Portfolio and another 18 per cent is in the Tax Law
Services Portfolio.
There are striking differences in the mix of advisory and litigation files across these three
portfolios. For example, in the BRL Portfolio, the majority of files in the active inventory are
advisory files whereas in both the CIPS and Tax Law Portfolios the majority of the files in
the active inventory are litigation files.
Department of Justice 43
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Figure 3 – Distribution of Files and Level of Effort by Portfolio
Distribution of Files by Portfolio
Level of Effort Dedicated to Legal Files by
Portfolio
Total number of active legal files
worked on in 2007-08: 69,697
Total level of effort dedicated
to providing legal services:
2,927,165 professional hours
Although the levels of demand and the nature of the work vary across portfolios, in comparison
to 2006–07 data, the distribution of files and the corresponding levels of effort devoted to the
management of those files have remained relatively stable.
A regional capacity is an important element of ensuring effective management of resources and
the responsiveness of our services. In this vein, 55 per cent of the active file inventory and
associated levels of effort are centered in the Regional Offices while the remaining 45 per cent
are located in Headquarters or Departmental Legal Service Units (DLSUs) (see Figure 4). In
comparison to 2006–07 data the distribution by region has remained relatively stable. This
would indicate that the Department is effectively matching resource levels to demand.
Figure 4 – Distribution of Files and Level of Effort by Region
Distribution of Legal Files by Region
44
Level of Effort Dedicated to Legal Files by Region
Total number of legal files
worked on in 2007-08: 69,697
Total level of effort dedicated to providing legal services:
2,927,165 professional hours
HQ/DLSU includes Legislative Services,
Litigation Branch and Public Law Sector
HQ/DLSU includes Legislative Services,
Litigation Branch and Public Law Sector.
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Figure 5, below, shows the distribution of the age of the litigation inventory at closing / resolution
for 2007–08. During the year, there were 37,716 actively managed litigation files of which
14,974 files were closed or resolved.11 As can be seen, the majority of litigation files closed
during the reporting period had been opened for six months or less, demonstrating the
Department’s success at resolving a large proportion of litigation files in a relatively short
period of time.
Figure 5 – Age of Litigation Files at Closing
Effective Management of Legal Risks
Another important element of effective management of resources concerns legal risk
management. Legal risk management applies to all government activities where legal risk may
arise, from policy development to program implementation and service delivery and, of course,
to litigation. Consequently, the management of legal risks is a joint responsibility between client
departments and the Department of Justice.
Legal risk management is a part of virtually all the legal and policy work that the department
undertakes. Sometimes it is required during the early days of an issue to avoid litigation. Other
times, it occurs when an issue or a case assumes a higher profile and senior officials or
ministers need to be informed as to the nature of the legal risk involved.
Figure 6 – Distribution of Litigation Files and Level of Effort by Level of Risk
Distribution of Litigation Files by Level of Risk
11
Level of Effort for Litigation Files by Level of Risk
Of these 14,974 closed litigation files, 1,871 litigation files were initiated by the Crown, 10,843 litigation files
were initiated against the Crown and 2,260 litigation files involved the Crown as a third party (intervener status).
Department of Justice 45
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
The Department actively tracks legal risk in the actively managed litigation inventory. In
general, about two-thirds of the actively managed litigation files are classified as low risk, while
just 29 per cent are medium risk and only 2 per cent are high risk (see Figure 6).12 However,
assessed levels of legal risk have major impacts on workloads, on the amount of flexibility in
the management of legal files and on the utilization of human resources.
For example, while only 2 per cent of the actively managed litigation inventory was identified as
being high risk, these files accounted for roughly 25 per cent of the total level of effort devoted
to managing litigation files last year. Invariably the higher the risk the greater the proportion of
senior counsel time that is required to address the range of issues that arise from these files
(see Figure 7).
Figure 7 – Total Levels of Effort Devoted to Low, Medium and High-risk Litigation by
Level of Counsel
Level of effort by level of Risk and Level of Counsel
High
Medium
Low
*
**
Higher risk files consume proportionately more senior effort than lower risk files.
“LA 1”, “LA 2A”, “LA 2B” and “LA 3” represent the internal classification levels for DoJ counsel.
As previously mentioned, the vast majority of litigation files are managed in the Regional
Offices and the nature of the actively managed litigation inventory varies quite a bit across the
six Regional Offices. In comparing the impacts of the differing levels of risk across the country,
what is most striking is the impact on the levels of resources (see Figure 8). By way of examples,
the Prairies Regional Office expends roughly equivalent levels of effort managing high-risk
and low-risk files even though the low-risk files represent 58 per cent and high risk represent
3 per cent of their actively managed litigation inventory.
12
46
A number of litigation files do not have a risk level identified and are either labelled “unable to assess” or have “not
yet been evaluated.” Figure excludes these files.
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Figure 8 – Total Levels of Effort Devoted to Low, Medium and High Risk Litigation
by Regional Offices
High
Medium
Low
Another means by which the Department effectively manages resources is to apply dispute
resolution mechanisms in order to resolve disputes between parties where possible and appropriate.
This alternative to litigation was applied to 2,130 of the 12,714 actively managed litigation files
initiated by the Crown or against the Crown that were closed or resolved during fiscal year
2007–08 (or 17 per cent of resolved litigation files). Most of these files (1,697 or 80 per cent)
were settled by mediation, arbitration or negotiation.
Litigation Outcomes
Another important indicator that we monitor relative to the services we provide to government
concerns litigation outcomes. We monitor this because one of our key roles is to represent the
Crown’s interests before the Courts.
Figure 9 graphically portrays the distribution of litigation files resolved during 2007–08. As can
be seen, approximately two-thirds of the files (64 per cent) were adjudicated, while just over
one-quarter were settled prior to a final adjudicated result. About one in eleven files were closed
administratively.
The overwhelming majority of the litigation files involve proceedings initiated against the
Crown. Specifically, 82 per cent of the litigation files in our actively managed inventory involve
claims against the Crown. Approximately 14 per cent of the inventory involve proceedings
initiated by the Crown, and the remaining 4 per cent of files are ones in which the Crown is
not directly implicated (e.g., intervener status).
Department of Justice 47
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Figure 9 – Litigation Outcomes
A quick review of the files resolved last year demonstrates that where the Crown initiated the
proceedings, the Crown’s position was allowed or granted in 91 per cent of the files. Conversely,
where proceedings were initiated against the Crown, the plaintiff’s position against the Crown
was allowed or granted in only 30 per cent of the files. In the remaining 70 per cent of the files
initiated against the Crown, the proceedings were dismissed, denied or disallowed. Figure 10
below graphically portrays this distribution.
Figure 10 – Outcome of adjudicated files for which proceedings were initiated by /
against the Crown.
Proceedings Initiated by the Crown 48
Proceedings Against the Crown
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Figure 11 below summarizes the Crown results for all litigation files closed during the reporting
period regardless of whether they were initiated by or against the Crown. As can be seen, the
Crown’s position was upheld on all issues in over two-thirds (69 per cent) of the litigation files
closed during the past fiscal year. In an additional 13 per cent of the files, the Crown’s position
was partially upheld on some but not all of the issues central to the dispute. Conversely, the
Crown’s position was not upheld in only 18 per cent of the files.
Figure 11 – Crown Results in Litigation Files
Crown Results in Litigation Files
Highlights of Significant Litigation Files Resolved During 2007–08
During 2007–08, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) rendered 55 decisions. 13 Of these, the
Government of Canada was involved in 31 cases either as an appellant, a respondent or an intervener.
The following is by no means an exhaustive listing of the major files, but does provide highlights
of some major litigation as a means to provide the reader with a sense of the range and types of
issues and challenges for which the Department represents the Crown’s interests in front of the
Supreme Court.
Victor Buffaloand Samson Band v. HMTQ
Two Bands (Samson and Ermineskin) commenced actions against the Crown in 1989 and 1992
respectively, alleging historical and ongoing mismanagement and breach of fiduciary duty in
relation to monies held in the Consolidated Revenue Fund, oil and gas situated on their reserves
and the funding of programs and services. The Bands are seeking damages, including interest,
in excess of $10 billion. The claims against the Crown were dismissed at trial and the appeal to
the Federal Court of Appeal was unsuccessful. The Bands obtained leave to appeal to the
Supreme Court of Canada and their appeal was heard in May of 2008. The decision of the
Supreme Court of Canada is under reserve.
13
For a complete listing of Supreme Court of Canada outcomes, please consult the following website:
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/
Department of Justice 49
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Canada (Attorney General) v. JTI-Macdonald Corp.
In response to the 1995 decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in RJR-MacDonald Corp.,
Parliament enacted the Tobacco Act and related Regulations, which permitted certain types
of advertising but restricted or eliminated others. The Regulations also increased the space
occupied by mandatory health warnings from 33% to 50%. The tobacco companies challenged
the new legislation on the basis of a violation of their freedom of expression. The Supreme Court
dismissed the cross-appeal of the tobacco companies and allowed the appeal of the Attorney
General. Although the Court found that most of the provisions at issue violated freedom of
expression, she was also of the view that the limit on free expression could be justified in a
free and democratic society.
Charkaoui v. Canada (MCI)
In its ruling, the Supreme Court of Canada generally affirmed the government’s ability to use
immigration law to attempt to remove non-citizens considered a threat to national security, and
to detain or impose strict conditions of release pending deportation. However, the Court found
certain aspects of the in camera, ex parte hearing process unconstitutional. Subsequent to the
Court’s decision, the Department has worked to amend government legislation to remedy the
constitutional deficiencies identified by the Court. In this vein, the Department is implementing
the Special Advocates Program in 2008–09.
In addition to the various litigation files in front of the Supreme Court, the department was
involved in numerous files where the application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court
of Canada was dismissed, reinforcing the position defended by the Crown. Two note-worthy
examples of such cases are presented below.
Authorson v. Canada
In July 2007, the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed this class action brought on behalf of
disabled veterans whose pensions and allowances had been administered by Veterans Affairs
Canada. The court upheld Parliament’s decision to require the government to pay interest on
these veterans’ accounts only from 1990 onward, and it overturned the order of the lower court
which had awarded $4.6 billion in damages to the class. The class’ subsequent application for
leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was dismissed in November 2007, ending this
decade-long litigation file.
Thamotharem and Restrepo-Benitez v. Canada (MCI)
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed applications for leave to appeal in two cases that
challenged Immigration and Refugee Board guidelines and had the potential to require the
re-determination of thousands of refugee claims. These cases also had the potential to negatively
affect the ability of the Canada Border Service Agency to enforce valid removal orders.
The Department also represents the Crown’s interests in Federal Court, Tax Court and in other
courts across Canada. The following seven examples provide brief descriptions to permit the
reader to better understand some of the other significant litigation files with which the
Department was involved during the past year.
50
II. ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Her Majesty the Queen v. Canadian Council for Refugees
In Her Majesty the Queen v. Canadian Council for Refugees, 2008 FCA 171, CIPS counsel
persuaded the Federal Court of Appeal (the “FCA”) to overturn a Federal Court decision which
had struck down the Safe Third Country Agreement (the “STCA”) between Canada and the
United States. The STCA is a bilateral treaty which requires refugee claimants to seek protection
in whichever of the two signatory countries they enter first, subject to certain exceptions. The
Federal Court’s decision had created the potential for a significant and immediate increase in
refugee claimants coming to Canada from the United States. In overturning the Federal Court’s
decision, the FCA held that the STCA was not ultra vires the powers of the Governor in Council
and that the Federal Court ought not have decided the Charter issues without a sufficient
factual basis for doing so. The FCA decision means that officials at Canada’s borders may
continue to rely on the STCA as way to help achieve the objectives of enhancing the orderly
handling of refugee claims, strengthening public confidence in the refugee system and ensuring
shared responsibility for protecting those in need.
GlaxoSmithKline v. Her Majesty the Queen
In this important transfer pricing case the Tax Court of Canada upheld CRA’s powers under the
Income Tax Act to identify, determine and adjust such transfers of input costs to that which it
considers fair market value in order to ensure that transfer pricing schemes cannot be used to
avoid taxation in Canada.
Indian Residential Schools
Class Action Settlement Agreements were approved by the courts in nine Canadian jurisdictions
and implementation proceeded after the opt-out deadline expired in August 2007. The courtsanctioned settlement agreement consists of four parts: common experience payment to be
paid to eligible former students, independent assessment process for claims of sexual or serious
physical abuse, healing and commemoration program and a Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
This represents the largest class-action settlement in Canadian history. In British Columbia and
the Yukon alone, approximately 11,500 former students have received common experience
payments. In addition, the settlement agreements have resulted in 1,287 dispute resolution
awards, 372 litigation settlements and 1,659 total settlements of former student abuse claims.
Davis et al. v. Attorney General of Canada
The Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal denied certification of a class-action suit on
behalf of more than 7,000 individuals of Mi’kmaq Indian ancestry, which sought $5.2 billion in
damages related to a denial of status as “Indians” under the Indian Act, a consequent loss of
entitlement to various statutory benefits and to have land reserves set aside for them.
Dumont/Manitoba Métis Federation v. Canada
In December 2007, the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench dismissed a claim by the Manitoba
Métis Federation that the Crown had not fulfilled its duties under the Manitoba Act.
The litigation raised significant financial risks. The Federation brought the matter to the
Manitoba Court of Appeal.
Department of Justice 51
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Roger William
In November 2007 the BC Supreme Court dismissed an extensive claim for Aboriginal title by
the Tsilhqot’in First Nation, but issued a non-binding opinion that Tsilhqot’in Aboriginal title
over a much smaller area exists. This file is important in that the scope and content of
Aboriginal title and the applicable legislative regime are important issues for all Canadians,
because they help to define Canada’s ongoing relationship with Aboriginal peoples and the role
of the provinces.
Lax Kw’alaams Indian Band v. Canada and British Columbia
In April 2008, the BC Supreme Court dismissed the Lax Kw’alaams claim of an Aboriginal right
to harvest and sell fish on a commercial scale. The claim, which has been appealed to the BC Court
of Appeal, challenges the scope of federal regulation of the fishery as a public resource and thus
the ability of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans to manage the Pacific commercial fishery.
3. Supporting Other Government Departments with High-quality Legal Services
As part of the Department’s efforts to ensure the provision of high-quality legal services across
government, the Department continued to roll out the first cycle of its standardized client
feedback survey to gauge perceptions of legal advisory, litigation and legislative services. The
Department developed the survey questionnaire in consultation with Statistics Canada and has
partnered with Statistics Canada, Canada Public Service Agency and Public Works and
Government Services Canada to roll out the web-based survey to a representative sampling of
clients from across the federal government.
As of March 31, 2008, we had received feedback from 4,150 Government of Canada employees
at the EX minus one and equivalent levels through to the Deputy Minister level from across
27 departments and agencies. Our overall response rate has been 31 per cent, which is within
acceptable standards for a web-based survey of this type.
Survey respondents were asked to provide feedback on a ten-point Likert scale on three core
elements of service quality — responsiveness, usefulness and timeliness — of our legal advisory,
legislative and litigation services, as well as on dispute resolution services where appropriate. As
we had no prior benchmarks, the Department has set an arbitrary target of 8.0 on the 10-point scale.
Based on the results to date, respondents have provided very positive feedback on the quality
of the legal services. The Department has met or exceeded the targets with the exception of
timeliness of advisory services (see Figure 12).
Figure 12 – Feedback Survey Results
52
Advisory
Services
Litigation
Services
Legislation
Services
Dispute
Resolution
Services
Overall Satisfaction
8.1
8.4
8.2
8.4
Responsiveness
8.6
8.4
8.5
8.6
Usefulness
8.1
8.2
8.0
8.2
Timeliness
7.8
8.3
8.0
8.3
III. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
SECTION III – SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION
Departmental Link to Government of Canada Outcome Areas
Strategic Outcome 1: A fair, relevant and accessible justice system
that reflects Canadian values
($ millions)
Actual Spending 2007-08
A1 – Justice Policies,
laws and Programs
A2 – Office of the Federal
Ombudsman for Victims
of Crime
Alignment to
Government of
Canada Outcome
Area
Budgetary
Non-budgetary
Total
408.3
0.0
408.3
Safe and secure
communities
0.7
0.0
0.7
Safe and secure
communities
Strategic Outcome 2: A federal government that is supported
by effective and responsive legal services
B1- Services to
government
277.2
0.0
277.2
Total
686.2
0
686.2
Federal
organizations that
support all
departments and
agencies through the
provision of
government services
Department of Justice 53
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Table 1: Comparison of Planned to Actual Spending (including FTEs)
2007–2008
2005–2006
2006–2007
Actual
Spending
Actual
Spending
Main
Estimates
Planned
Spending
Total
Authorities
Actual
Spending
29.3
37.5
41.1
44.1
42.0
39.5
369.9
363.0
273.4
385.5
390.8
368.8
10.8
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1.5
1.5
0.7
Providing legal advisory,
litigation and legislative
services to government
436.3
461.0
281.2
286.6
299.6
277.2
Providing prosecution
services
113.3
112.7
-
-
-
-
Total
959.6
974.2
595.7
717.7
733.9
686.2
(175.5)
(176.6)
N/A
(10.4)
N/A
(44.6)
72.8
75.7
N/A
76.4
N/A
66.1
Total Departmental
Spending
856.9
873.3
N/A
783.7
N/A
707.7
Full-time Equivalents
4,710
4,812
N/A
4,140
N/A
4,239
($ millions)
Developing policies
and laws
Delivering and
Implementing
programs
Managing and
coordinating the
strategic policies/
priorities function
Office of the Federal
Ombudsman for
Victims of Crime
Less: Non-respendable
revenue
Plus: Cost of services
received without charge
Note 1:
Note 2: Note 3: 54
Actual spending differs from amount reported as Net cost of operations (715.7 mill.) in Financial Statements.
Reconciliation of these two amounts is provided in Note 3 of the Financial Statements
Non-Respendable Revenue includes Cost Recovery in fiscal year ending in 2006 and 2007.
Previous reports listed Providing prosecution services which is now the responsibility of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada (PPSC)
who now report their spending and FTEs independently. However, for 2005-06 and 2006-07, FPS was still part of DoJ and is therefore
included in this table.
III. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Table 2: Voted and Statutory Items
2007–2008
Vote or
Statutory
Item
Truncated Vote or Statutory
Wording
Vote 1
Main
Estimates
Planned
Spending
Total
Authorities
Actual
Operating expenditures
262.0
272.3
298.2
268.4
Vote 5
Grants and contributions
266.4
378.1
380.2
362.3
(S)
Minister of Justice—Salary and
motor car allowance
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
(S)
Contributions to employee
benefit plans
67.2
67.2
55.4
55.4
595.7
717.7
733.9
686.2
Total Department of Justice
List of Online Tables
Table 3: Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue
For supplementary information on the department’s sources of respendable and nonrespendable revenue please visit http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2007-2008/index-eng.asp
Table 4-A: User Fees/External Fees
For supplementary information on the department’s User Fees, please visit
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2007-2008/index-eng.asp
Table 4-B: User Fees Act (and Policy on Service Standards for
External Fees)
For supplementary information on the department’s Service Standards for External Fees, please
visit http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2007-2008/index-eng.asp
Department of Justice 55
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Table 5: Details on Transfer Payment Programs (TPPs)
For supplementairy information on TPP’s, please visit
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2007-2008/index-eng.asp
Table 6: Horizontal Initiatives
Supplementary information on horizontal initiatives, please visit
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/eppi-ibdrp/hrdb-rhbd/profil_e.asp
Table 7: Sustainable Development Strategy
For supplementary information on the department’s Sustainable Development Strategy,
please visit http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2007-2008/index-eng.asp
Table 8: Response to Parliamentary Committees and
External Audits
For supplementary information on the department’s response to Parliamentary Committees
and External Audits please visit http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2007-2008/index-eng.asp
Table 9: Internal Audits and Evaluations
For supplementary information on the department’s Internal Audits and Evaluations,
please visit http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2007-2008/index-eng.asp
Table 10: Travel Policies
For supplementary information on the department’s travel policies,
please visit http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2007-2008/index-eng.asp
Table 11: Financial Statements
For supplementary information on the department’s Financial Statements,
please visit http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2007-2008/index-eng.asp
56
III. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Section IV – Other Items of Interest
Corporate Management
In order to facilitate the successful delivery of outcomes for Canadians, the Department
establishes corporate priorities and plans to improve management. Our activities in this vein
reflect the elements of the Government’s Management Accountability Framework (MAF).
For the 2007–08 reporting period, our corporate priorities included Our People, and
the Implementation of the Sustainable Funding Regime (stemming from the Review
of Legal Services).
Our People
Over the course of the past year, a more strategic and integrated approach has been taken to
strengthen the leadership and management cadre within the Department. Particular focus
was based on developing leadership capacity and strengthening management capacity in areas
such as planning and managing in a unionized work environment. Renewal and modernization
continued to be key priorities within the Department. To this end, the Department worked
diligently on the implementation of the priorities and activities of our three-year Human
Resources Management Plan (2007–2010), which is built around and supports the four pillars
under the umbrella of Public Service Renewal as communicated by the Clerk; namely, Planning,
Recruitment, Employee Development and Enabling Infrastructure. The Department implemented
various strategies and initiatives to respond to the Clerk’s 2007–08 Renewal Action Plan, to
ensure that our departmental workforce remained representative of Canadian society, to
respond to our commitment to continuous learning and professional development of our
employees, and to respond to the workplace health needs and the Public Service Employee
Survey (PSES) results.
Some of the specific initiatives are detailed below:
• Numerous internal learning programs addressing legal, management/leadership and
professional development were offered to employees. These included Advanced
Negotiation Skills, Project Planning, Staffing for Managers, Labour Relations Training
for Managers, What Justice Employees Need to Know about the Law, Promoting your
Professional Development, Applying for a Position in the Public Service, to name but a
few of the programs offered. In addition, Individual Learning Plans were developed for
all staff as part of the performance management process.
• A National Outreach and Recruitment Strategy was developed for the legal stream (lawyers,
paralegals and legal assistants) to better leverage outreach and recruitment in a consistent
and integrated manner. The Governing Council endorsed this in February 2008, as did the
HRCOM in March 2008. An action plan for year one activities was developed for
implementation commencing in 2008–09.
14
For further details on the Government’s Management Accountability Framework (MAF) and about the
Department’s MAF ratings and progress, please consult http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/maf-crg/intro_e.asp.
Department of Justice 57
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
• The ADM Talent Management exercise was implemented within the Department and high
potential candidates for succession planning purposes were identified. In addition, an LA
3C collective staffing process was undertaken to support succession planning at the ADM
level within the Department and work commenced on the development of a succession planning framework for the senior levels of the LA Group. The department also promoted
and supported participation in a number of external leadership development programs
such as the AEXDP (which now includes an LA stream), the Advanced Leadership Program,
Career on the Move, etc.
• The department entered into year two of its two-year pilot Justice Leaders of Tomorrow
Program (JLTP), a program aimed at developing leadership capacity to meet the future
needs of the organization. An evaluation of the program resulted in a number of
recommendations regarding its future; they will be implemented over the course of the
next fiscal year before launching a second call for the program in 2009. The program continues to support the achievement of our employment equity goals.
• In the fall of 2007, the current cohort of JLTP participants presented their short-term
recommendations to Governing Council in response to four issues identified in the PSES.
These recommendations pertained to work-life balance, official languages in the workplace,
career development, and harassment and discrimination. JLTP ambassadors from each
group were nominated to support the implementation of the approved recommendations.
Their recommendations were incorporated into the Departmental Human Resources
Management Plan.
• In April of 2008, both HR.COM and SMB approved the use of PS Leadership Competencies
in the Department in order to support a leadership development strategy encompassing
recruitment, performance management, leadership development and succession planning.
• Senior Management approved a National Mentoring Program with a strong Employment
Equity component open to all employees. The new mentoring program will be officially
launched in 2008.
• In addition to the National Mentoring Program, a number of other initiatives were
implemented within the department to ensure the attainment of our Employment Equity
goals as well as to improve accountability for results in this area. The Department offered
training on bias-free selection, launched the Objective Eye tool, issued a new directive on
the use of Employment Equity as an organizational tool where there has been persistent
under-representation, developed new performance measures and integrated them into
the Performance Management program, and obtained approval for the development and
delivery of mandatory diversity training for all staff commencing in the fall 2008.
• Work continued on two classification standard modernization initiatives, specifically for
the LA Group and the EC Group, which comprises paralegals and policy analysts within the
Department. During the reporting period, model work descriptions were developed and a
comprehensive review of all organizational units was undertaken in order to clearly define
our management cadre. These initiatives will position the Department to ensure that the
EC standard work is completed within prescribed time frames and to support the
implementation of the new LA standard once Treasury Board approves it.
• Work commenced on the development of a strategy and action plan to build Official
Languages capacity in the workplace.
58
IV. OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
• In order to ensure our commitment to open dialogue on public service values and ethics,
and to ensure that our employees know their rights and responsibilities under the Values
and Ethics Code for the Public Service (the Code), the Public Servants Disclosure Protection
Act (PSDPA) and the departmental harassment policy entitled Towards a Workplace Free
of Conflict and Harassment, the Department established the Office for Ethics, Disclosure
Protection and Harassment Complaints in the summer of 2007 and launched a new Intranet
site to serve as a key resource for all employees.
Implementation of the Sustainable Funding Regime
The Review of Legal Services to Government was undertaken in collaboration with the Treasury
Board Secretariat in 2004–05 with the following two objectives:
• to improve the sustainability of the delivery of legal services in government by recommending
strategies to improve legal services delivery and ensure a sustainable funding regime; and
• to identify approaches to effectively manage litigation in the federal government.
The findings and final recommendations from the Review as well as the rate structure and
annual legal services rates for 2007–08 were presented to and approved by TB Ministers in
March 2007.
With the development of targeted recommendations and a successful presentation of its key
findings to Treasury Board and approval of the funding model for the delivery of legal services
to government, the Review of Legal Services has successfully completed its mandate.
During 2007–08, Justice moved forward with the implementation of the Treasury Board
approved recommendations from the Review, including the following:
• introducing a net voting regime that provides Justice with the authority to spend revenues
received from departments and agencies for legal services rendered as well as the legal
services rate structure and rates that were implemented on April 1, 2007;
• strengthening capacity to capture more complete business and strategic information
on the services that Justice provides to government;
• continuing to lead the development of best practices in the management of disputes; and
• buttressing research efforts in the monitoring of litigation trends and drivers in government.
Over the past year, the Department of Justice continued to work closely with the Treasury Board
Secretariat, departments and agencies in relation to the implementation of the legal services
funding and recovery model. In addition, the Department of Justice has also obtained approval
in February 2008 for the 2008–09 legal services rates.
Department of Justice 59
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Legislation for which the Department is Responsible:
The Department of Justice exists by virtue of the Department of Justice Act, first passed in 1868.
The Act establishes the Department’s role and sets out the powers, duties and functions of the
Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of Canada.
In addition to this general enabling statute, the Minister and the Department have
responsibilities under a number of other laws. These range from fairly routine matters, such as
tabling the annual report of an agency in Parliament, to broader responsibilities, such as the
obligation to review all government bills and regulations for compliance with the Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Statutory Instruments Act.
The laws for which the Minister has sole or shared responsibility to Parliament are listed below. 15
Access to Information Act, R.S. 1985, c. A-1
(responsibility shared with the President of the Treasury Board ).16
Annulment of Marriages Act (Ontario), R.S.C. 1970, c. A-14.
Anti-Terrorism Act, S.C. 2001, c. 41.
Bills of Lading Act, R.S. 1985, c. B-5 (responsibility shared with the Minister of Transport).
Canada Evidence Act, R.S. 1985, c. C-5.
Canada-United Kingdom Civil and Commercial Judgments Convention Act, R.S. 1985, c. C-30.
Canada Prize Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. P-24.
Canadian Bill of Rights, S.C. 1960, c. 44; reprinted in R.S.C. 1985, Appendix III.
Canadian Human Rights Act, R.S. 1985, c. H-6.
Civil Marriage Act, 2005. c.33
Commercial Arbitration Act, R.S. 1985, c. 17 (2nd Supp.).
Contraventions Act, S.C. 1992, c. 47.
Courts Administration Service Act, S.C. 2002, c. 8.
Criminal Code, R.S. 1985, c. C-46 (responsibility shared with the Minister of Public Safety and
Emergency Preparedness, and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food (s. 204)). 17
Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, R.S. 1985, c. C-50.
Department of Justice Act, R.S. 1985, c. J-2.
Director of Public Prosecutions Act –2006, c.9, s.121
Divorce Act, R.S. 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp.).
This list, prepared in July 2008, is an unofficial version for information only.
15
16
Responsibility shared with the President of the Treasury Board in the following manner: Minister of Justice (for
purposes of paragraph (b) of the definition of “head” in section 3, subsection 4(2), paragraphs 77(1) (f) and (g) and
subsection 77(2)); and the President of the Treasury Board (for all other purposes of the Act) (SI/83-108).
17
The portfolio of the Solicitor General of Canada was replaced by the portfolio of Public Safety and Emergency
Preparedness on December 12th, 2003.
60
IV. OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Escheats Act, R.S. 1985, c. E-13.
Extradition Act, S.C. 1999, c. 18. 18
Family Orders and Agreements Enforcement Assistance Act, R.S. 1985, c. 4 (2nd Supp.).
Federal Courts Act, R.S. 1985, c. F-7.19
Federal Law-Civil Harmonization Act, No.1, S.C. 2001, c. 4.
Federal Law and Civil Law of the Province of Quebec Act -- 2001, c. 4, Part 1
Foreign Enlistment Act, R.S. 1985, c. F-28.
Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act, R.S. 1985, c. F-29.
Garnishment, Attachment and Pension Diversion Act, R.S. 1985, c. G-2 (responsibility shared
with the Minister of National Defence, Minister of Public Works and Government Services,
and Minister of Finance 20).
Identification of Criminals Act, R.S. 1985, c. I-1.
International Sale of Goods Contracts Convention Act, S.C. 1991, c. 13.
Interpretation Act, R.S. 1985, c. I-21.
Judges Act, R.S. 1985, c. J-1.
Law Commission of Canada Act, S.C. 1996, c. 9.
Legislative Instruments Re-enactment Act, S.C. 2002, c. 20.
Marriage (Prohibited Degrees) Act, S.C. 1990, c. 46.
Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, S.C. 2000, c. 12.
Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, R.S. 1985, c. 30 (4th Supp.).
18
Section 84 of the new Extradition Act, 1999, c. 18, provides that the repealed Act (R.S. 1985, c. E-23) applies to a
matter respecting the extradition of a person as though it had not been repealed, if the hearing in respect of the
extradition had already begun on June 17, 1999.
Formerly the Federal Court Act. The title was amended to the Federal Courts Act in the Courts Administration
Service Act, S.C. 2002, c. 8, s. 14.
19
20
Responsibility shared in the following manner: (a) Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, General
(Part I) (SI/84-5), and for the purposes of sections 46 and 47 of the Act, items 12 and 16 of the schedule to the Act
and the other provisions of Part II of the Act as those provisions relate to the Judges Act (SI/84-6); (b) the Minister of
National Defence, for the purposes of the provisions, except sections 46 and 47, of Part II of the Act as those provisions
relate to the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and the Defence Services Pension Continuation Act (SI/84-6); (c) the
Minister of Finance, for the purposes of the provisions, except sections 46 and 47, of Part II of the Act as those provisions relate to the Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act (SI/84-6); and (d) the Minister of Public Works and
Government Services, for the purposes of the provisions, except sections 46 and 47, of Part II of the Act
as those provisions relate to
(i) the Governor General’s Act,
(ii) the Lieutenant Governor’s Superannuation Act,
(iii) the Diplomatic Service (Special) Superannuation Act,
(iv) the Public Service Superannuation Act,
(v) the Civil Service Superannuation Act,
(vi) the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act, Part I,
(vii) the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Pension Continuation Act, Parts II and III,
(viii) the Currency, Mint and Exchange Fund Act, subsection 15(2) (R.S. 1952, c. 315)
(ix) the War Veterans Allowance Act, subsection 28(10),
(x) regulations made under Vote 181 of Appropriation Act No. 5, 1961, and
(xi) the Tax Court of Canada Act (SI/84-6).
Department of Justice 61
DEPARTMENTAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2007-2008
Official Languages Act, R.S. 1985, c. 31 (4th Supp.).
Postal Services Interruption Relief Act, R.S. 1985, c. P-16.
Privacy Act, R.S. 1985, c. P-21
(responsibility shared with the President of the Treasury Board 21).
Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985 Act, R.S. 1985, c. 40 (3rd Supp.).
Security Offences Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-7.
Security of Information Act, R.S. 1985, c. O-5.
State Immunity Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-18.
Statute Revision Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-20.
Statutory Instruments Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-22.
Supreme Court Act, R.S. 1985, c. S-26.
Tackling Violent Crime Act, 2008, c.6
Tax Court of Canada Act, R.S. 1985, c. T-2.
United Nations Foreign Arbitral Awards Convention Act, R.S. 1985, c. 16 (2nd Supp.).
Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. 2002, c. 1
(replaces Young Offenders Act, R.S. 1985, c. Y-1).
Contact Information
Media Inquiries:
Communications Branch
Telephone: 613-957-4207
Fax: 613-954-0811
Public Inquiries:
Communications Branch
Telephone: 613-957-4222
TDD/TTY: 613-992-4556
Fax: 613-954-0811
Responsibility is shared in the following manner: Minister of Justice, for purposes of paragraph (b) of the definition
of “head” in section 3, subsection 12(3), paragraphs 77(1) (a), (d), (g) and (l) and subsection 77(2); President of the
Treasury Board, for all other purposes of the Act (SI/83109).
21
62
IV. OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Information Online
For more information about the management terms used in this document, please contact
the Treasury Board Secretariat’s Lexicon for Reporting:
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20052006/lex_e.asp
For more information about the Department of Justice, please consult
the following electronic publications:
About the Department of Justice
http://www.justice.gc.ca
Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Support Fund
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/pb/prog/official_languages.html
Department of Justice Evaluation Reports
http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/eval/index.html
Department of Justice Internal Audit Reports
http://canada.justice.gc.ca/eng/dept-min/pub/aud-ver/index.html
Departmental Performance Report, 2006–2007
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/dpr-rmr/2006-2007/inst/jus/jus00-eng.asp
Public Legal Education and Information
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/pb/prog/legal_ed.html
Report on Plans and Priorities, 2007–2008
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rpp/0708/Jus-Jus/Jus-Jus_e.asp
Research and Statistics
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/rs/index.html
Sustainable Development Strategy, 2007-2009
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/sds/07_09/index.html
The Department of Justice produces many publications and reports on a variety of subjects.
For a complete listing, please visit the Publications page on our Internet site:
http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/subject_index.html
Department of Justice 63